U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

76–579 2013

THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN: PROMOTING 

BROADBAND ADOPTION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, 

TECHNOLOGY, AND THE INTERNET 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 13, 2010 

Serial No. 111–124 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

Chairman 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

Chairman Emeritus 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

Vice Chairman 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANE HARMAN, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

JIM MATHESON, Utah 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

BETTY SUTTON, Ohio 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Ranking Member 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

PHIL GINGREY, Georgia 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE INTERNET

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

Chairman 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan (ex officio) 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

Ranking Member 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

MARY BONO MACK, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Rick Boucher, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth 

of Virginia, opening statement ............................................................................ 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 4 

Hon. Cliff Stearns, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 7 

Hon. Henry A. Waxman, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

California, opening statement ............................................................................. 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 10 

Hon. Joe Barton, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 12 

Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, opening statement .................................................................................... 12 

Hon. John Shimkus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 13 

Hon. G.K. Butterfield, a Representative in Congress from the State of North 

Carolina, opening statement ............................................................................... 14 

Hon. Robert E. Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 15 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 17 

Hon. Parker Griffith, a Representative in Congress from the State of Alabama, opening statement .................................................................................... 20 

Hon. Lee Terry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 20 

Hon. Anna G. Eshoo, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, opening statement .................................................................................... 21 

Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee, opening statement ............................................................................ 22 

Hon. Zachary T. Space, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Ohio, opening statement ...................................................................................... 22 

Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 111 

WITNESSES

Carol Mattey, Deputy Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal Communications Commission .......................................................................................... 24 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26 

Rachelle Chong, Special Counsel, California Office of the Chief Information 

Officer .................................................................................................................... 31 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 33 

Rikvah Sass, Director, Sacramento Public Library System ................................. 37 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39 

C. Howie Hodges II, Senior Vice President, Government Affairs, One Economy ........................................................................................................................ 53 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55 

Laura Taylor, Chief Policy Officer, Connected Nation ......................................... 62 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 64 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN: 

PROMOTING BROADBAND ADOPTION 

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2010 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE INTERNET, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., in Room 

2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Rick Boucher 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Boucher, Eshoo, DeGette, 

Butterfield, Matsui, Space, Welch, Waxman (ex officio), Stearns, 

Shimkus, Shadegg, Terry, Blackburn, Griffith, Latta, and Barton 

(ex officio). 

Staff present: Roger Sherman, Chief Counsel; Tim Powderly, 

Senior Counsel; Amy Levine, Counsel; Shawn Chang, Counsel; 

Greg Guice, Counsel; Bruce Wolpe, Senior Advisor; Pat Delgado, 

Chief of Staff (Waxman); Sarah Fisher, Special Assistant; Mitch 

Smiley, Special Assistant; Will Carty, Professional Staff Member, 

CTCP; and Neil Fried, Telecommunications Counsel. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK BOUCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH 

OF VIRGINIA 

Mr. BOUCHER. The hearing will come to order. Good morning to 

everyone. Today is the fourth in the series of hearings that we are 

conducting on the FCC’s recently released National Broadband 

Plan. Last month, the subcommittee considered how best to deploy 

broadband in areas that are unserved and underserved so that all 

Americans, particularly those in the rural stretches of our Nation, 

will have access to this vital and critical infrastructure, which 

broadband in this century has become. 

Our hearing today is a corollary to our hearing on broadband deployment. Once Americans have access to quality broadband services, what steps should be taken in order to encourage them to subscribe to it? According to the National Broadband Plan, about 35 

percent of Americans or about 80 million adults do not use 

broadband at home even though they have access to the service. 

This number includes high percentages of low-income households, 

minorities, seniors, individuals with low levels of education, residents in rural areas and individuals with disabilities. 

The National Broadband Plan identifies several barriers to 

broadband adoption, including cost, digital literacy, including a 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

general level of discomfort with computers, concerns about Internet 

safety and security, and, in the minds of some, a perceived lack of 

relevance of broadband in people’s lives. One proposal to make 

broadband more affordable for low-income households is to expand 

the Lifeline and Linkup programs contained within the Federal 

Universal Service Fund. And I want to commend our committee 

colleague, Ms. Matsui from California, for her leadership in this 

area including the introduction of legislation pertaining to the matter. 

It is my hope that soon we will be prepared in the subcommittee 

to mark up the Universal Service Reform Measure that I put forward in partnership with Mr. Terry, and I very much look forward 

to working with the gentlelady from California at that time in 

order to assure that her goals are reflected in the legislation. 

We will welcome the testimony of our witnesses this morning on 

ways that broadband adoption can be expanded, and I want to 

thank each of them for taking the time to join us and share their 

thoughts. 

Anticipating that some members of our subcommittee may take 

the occasion of today’s broadband hearing to comment on the FCC’s 

decision to apply selected sections of Title II to broadband, I will 

also offer a few comments on that subject this morning. 

The D.C. Circuit’s decision in the Comcast case has cast doubt 

on the FCC’s authority to implement many elements of the National Broadband Plan and to enforce the four principles of network 

neutrality that were adopted under the guidance of former FCC 

Chairman Michael Powell. Those four principles adopted during his 

tenure were consensus based. They were noncontroversial, and the 

FCC now has a rule-making underway that would add to those four 

principles, principles of nondiscrimination and transparency. 

The Comcast decision has placed in doubt the FCC’s ability to go 

forward with that rule-making as well as to enforce the existing 

four network neutrality principles. In order to address these concerns, Chairman Jenachowski has decided to proceed with a light 

regulatory touch that fits with the commission’s settled deregulatory policy framework for broadband services. 

The FCC will classify the transmission component of broadband 

access services as telecommunications services under Title II of the 

Communications Act and will forebear from applying all but six of 

Title II 48 provisions. Essentially, the commission will apply the 

broadband prohibitions on unreasonable denials of service and 

other unjust and unreasonable practices. The commission will also 

apply universal service principles that will assure the provision of 

advanced network services, will protect the confidentiality of customer call records, and will assure the accessibility of telecommunication services to people who have disabilities. 

The commission has adopted, in my view, a very limited approach to assuring network openness. But another path also exists 

for achieving these goals. If broadband providers differ with the approach that the FCC has taken in applying six of a total of 48 sections of Title II to broadband, our door is open. We would be 

pleased to discuss with broadband providers and with the proponents of network neutrality the creation of a targeted set of principles to assure network openness. If those discussions produce conVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:17 Feb 01, 2013 Jkt 076579 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A579.XXX A579

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

sensus, Congress could enact legislation adopting the agreed-upon 

principles as a means of providing regulatory certainty. That is the 

path I hope we can follow. 

If broadband providers are of the view that targeted legislation 

is now preferable to the selected application of Title II to 

broadband, I invite them to engage in discussions with us on what 

those targeted provisions should be. I am ready to work with members of this subcommittee on both sides of the aisle and with interested members of the full committee as we discuss with an array 

of stakeholders the best way to proceed in this matter. 

By acting in a bipartisan, consensus-based manner, we can provide certainty for network operators, for edge providers, and also 

for consumers that the Internet will remain the innovative engine 

for economic growth in a minimally regulated environment that it 

is today. 

That concludes my opening statement. I am pleased now to recognize the gentleman from Florida, ranking Republican member of 

our subcommittee, Mr. Stearns. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Boucher follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 9 here 76579A.001

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN RICK BOUCHER 

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet Hearing 

The National Broadband Plan: Promoting Broadband Adoption 

May 13,2010 

This morning we conduct the fourth in a series of hearings focusing on the 

National Broadband Plan. 

Last month, the Subcommittee considered how best to deploy broadband to 

areas that are unserved and underserved, so that all Americans, particularly those 

in rural areas, may benefit from this essential infrastructure. 

Our hearing today is a corollary to our hearing on broadband deployment: 

Once Americans have access to quality broadband services, what steps should be 

taken to encourage them to subscribe to it? 

According to the National Broadband Plan, about 35 percent of Americans, 

or about 80 million adults, do not use broadband at home. This number includes 

high percentages oflow-income households, minorities, seniors, individuals with 

low levels of education, residents of rural areas and people with disabilities. 

The National Broadband Plan identifies several barriers to broadband 

adoption: cost; digital literacy, including discomfort with computers; concerns 

about Internet safety and security; and a perceived lack of relevance of broadband 

to peoples' lives. 

One proposal to make broadband more affordable for low-income 

households is to expand the Lifeline and Link-Up programs of the Universal 

Service Fund to cover broadband services. I want to commend my colleague, Ms. 

Matsui, for her leadership in this area, including the introduction of legislation 

regarding this matter. It is my hope that we will soon be prepared to mark up the 

Universal Service Reform measure which Mr. Terry and I have put forward, and I 

look forward to working with the gentlelady from California to asSUre that her 

goals are reflected in that legislation. 

We will welcome the testimony of our witnesses this morning on ways that 

broadband adoption can be expanded, and I thank each of them for their presence 

here. 
5 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 10 here 76579A.002

Anticipating that some members may take the occasion of to day's 

broadband hearing to comment on the FCC's decision to apply selected sections of 

Title II to broadband, I will offer several comments on that subject as well. 

The D.C. Circuit's decision in the Comcast case has cast doubt on the FCC's 

authority to implement many elements of the National Broadband Plan, to enforce 

the four principles of network neutrality adopted under FCC Chariman Powell's 

guidance, which were consensus based and non-controversial, and to proceed with 

the rulemaking that would add principles on non-discrimination and transparency 

to the four preexisting network neutrality principles. 

To address these concerns, Chairman Genachowski decided to proceed with 

a light regulatory touch that fits with the Commission's settled, deregulatory policy 

framework for broadband services. The FCC will classify the transmission 

component of broadband access services as "telecommunications services" subject 

to Title II of the Communications Act and will forbear from applying all but six of 

Title II's 48 provisions. 

Essentially the Commission will apply to broadband prohibitions on 

unreasonable denials of service and other unjust and unreasonable practices. 

The Commission will also apply Universal Service principles that will 

assure the provision of advanced network services will protect the confidentiality 

of customer call records and will assure the accessibility of telecommunications 

services to people with disabilities. 

The Commission has adopted a limited approach to assuring network 

openness. 

Another path also exists for achieving these goals. 

If broadband providers differ with the approach of the FCC in applying six 

of 48 sections of Title II to broadband, our door is open. 

We would be pleased to discuss with broadband providers and the 

proponents of network neutrality the creation of a targeted set of principles to 

assure network openness. 

If those discussions produce consensus, Congress could enact legislation 

adopting the agreed upon principles as a means of providing regulatory certainty. 
6 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 76579A.003

That is the path I hope we can follow. 

If broadband providers are of the view that targeted legislation is now 

preferable to the selected application of Title II to broadband, I invite them to 

engage in discussions with us on what those targeted provisions should be. 

I am ready to work with members on both sides of the aisle and with the 

array of stakeholders with interests in this matter. By acting in a bipartisan, 

consensus-based manner, we can provide certainty for network operators, edge 

providers and consumers that the Internet will remain the innovative engine for 

economic growth in a minimally regulated environment that it is today. 

-###-
7 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CLIFF STEARNS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Mr. STEARNS. Good morning, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. And 

let me compliment you on your opening statement. I totally agree 

that if the FCC intends to—your words or their words—take a light 

regulatory touch, that they should come up here before they start 

this ‘‘light regulatory touch.’’ We have seen the government regulations in the past, and they are anything but light. 

In light of the fact that 95 percent of the households, 65 percent 

of Americans using broadband at home and the number of adult 

residential users are up to 200 million, we don’t have a deployment 

or adoption problem. The Internet seems to be working pretty good. 

I am not sure Mr. Jenachowski, the chairman of the FCC, needs 

to do a regulatory touch at this time. And he has touched upon 

some of the things that he would like to do in terms of transparency, nondiscrimination. He has also touched upon universal 

service reform. 

Now you have a bill, Mr. Chairman, dealing with universal service fund. I don’t think the FCC should reach out into Title II and 

to start to regulate dealing with the Universal Service Fund. We 

should allow your bill to become the law of the land and certainly 

have the members of this committee, full committee, and Congress, 

the people of the United States, to have some input on this. 

Net neutrality is a term which has various meaning to many people. Certainly to me, it means net regulation, so I applaud you and 

your outline this morning of what they intend to do and how you 

are willing to reach out to the FCC and say you intend to do these 

principles. We think, if you will sit down with us, we can come up 

through the subcommittee, mark it up, and try to move forward 

with the bill. 

So under that opening statement and what you said, I think, Mr. 

Chairman, the next step is to have a hearing exactly on this comment period about net neutrality and to go through some of the 

principles that the FCC chairman has outlined in the press. And 

we should discuss them with him, and, as you pointed out, we can 

come up with some principles together and move forward so that 

this committee, one, retains jurisdiction over the Internet and not 

let the FCC move into Title II and take over with their ‘‘light regulatory touch’’ which we all know what that means. 

We know that during the campaign, the President promised net 

neutrality, and so, you know, this appears to be moving in a political direction in my opinion. I only say this because we saw that 

Mr. Jenachowski at one point said that he was not going to do anything and he was going to leave it to our committee. And then suddenly he flipped in one week and now says he is. And so I assume 

that there has been a lot of pressure on him from the executive 

branch, and now he wants to move out and do this himself. 

You know Congress did not intend for broadband services to be 

subject to common carrier regulations. The FCC’s attempt to do so 

could rebuke—was rebuked by the courts, which you pointed out 

earlier, which mean that the FCC will be wasting a lot of valuable 

time because people are going to go out and sue the FCC when 

they come up with their net neutralities. Whereas if they did it 

through our committee, Mr. Chairman, I think we would have a biVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:17 Feb 01, 2013 Jkt 076579 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A579.XXX A579

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

partisan consensus, which we normally do out of this subcommittee, and we could pass something that I think would fulfill 

some of these objectives, certainly in the idea of transparency. 

When you go to get an Internet speed from a provider, you want 

to make sure it is five megabytes or whether it is four megabytes. 

You don’t want to get on your downloading, uploading, and find out 

it is less than one megabyte. So that is important, and some of the 

anti-discriminatory is civil rights and for disabilities. And some of 

that, I think, is good. But I think the point you have made this 

morning is that we are willing to reach out and develop the consensus principles from industry and through the FCC and to move 

forward together in this. 

Towards that end, I introduced a bill, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 5257, 

which basically is a way for us to say to the FCC prove there is 

market failure that you need these things. I ask the FCC in my bill 

to conduct a rigorous market and cost/benefit analysis before imposing any network neutrality rules. They should have to evaluate 

whether any provider has market power, taking into consideration 

the cross-platform competition among wireline, wireless, and satellite providers. The FCC should also have to consider whether, as 

a market failure, whether such failure harms consumer and whether regulations are necessary to ameliorate the harm to consumers. 

I hope my colleagues on this side of the aisle certainly would cosponsor my bill, and I think if we could do that, I think we could 

move forward. And again, Mr. Chairman, I applaud you for your 

opening statement. I am 100 percent behind you, and I hope you 

can convince Mr. Waxman to have a hearing on this so that we can 

have the jurisdiction of the subcommittee and the full committee 

in play before the FCC moves out unilaterally. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Stearns, and let me 

say that I will look forward to working with you and all interested 

parties. To clarify, nothing that I said was critical of any step 

taken by the FCC to this point in time. I simply want to point out 

that there is another path open, and if broadband providers in particular believe that it is more desirable now for Congress to act, our 

door is open for conversations. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Waxman, chairman of the 

full committee, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY A. WAXMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for calling 

this hearing so that we could have an opportunity to talk about all 

the things on our minds in the area of telecommunications. Our 

committee is interested in this hearing and other hearings. We are 

open for business, and we will be happy to review different ideas. 

But the idea for today is the question of a National Broadband 

Plan for greater broadband adoption. And I would like to first welcome two Californians on our panel. Rachelle Chong is here on behalf of California’s Chief Information Office, and Rivkah Sass is 

here on behalf of Sacramento Public Library System. Thank you 

both for being here. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

At our last hearing, I mentioned the importance of broadband deployment to America’s future. Today we will hear testimony about 

efforts and proposals designed to address the other side of the 

broadband equation, broadband adoption. To put a number on just 

how important broadband adoption is, according to the Broadband 

Plan, 62 percent of American workers rely on the Internet to perform their jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts that jobs 

dependent on broadband will grow by 25 percent over the next 

eight years or two and a half times faster than the average growth 

across all occupations and industries. 

So when we talk about addressing adoption barriers, we are talking about addressing barriers to future economic growth and job 

growth. The largest barrier identified by the broadband plan is 

cost. The plan recommends addressing the cost barrier in part by 

expanding the Universal Service Fund’s Lifeline and Linkup Program for low-income consumers. 

Congresswoman Matsui has long recognized that expanding Lifeline and Linkup is an important common sense approach to encourage broadband adoption. To that end, in September of last year, 

she introduced H.R. 3646, The Broadband Affordability Act, and I 

support her legislation and commend her for her leadership on this 

issue. 

In addition to costs, the plan identified a lack of digital literacy 

as a barrier to adoption. The plan recommends promoting digital 

literacy through volunteer and other efforts to train those who need 

and want help. These proposals are worth pursuing. If we are going 

to take full advantage of the benefits that broadband offers for the 

country, we will have to closely examine these two major issues for 

consumers: cost and digital literacy. 

And I want to thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 

hearing and our witnesses who are here today for being prepared 

to give us the benefit of their views. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Waxman follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
10 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 15 here 76579A.004

H~NlW A. WAXM~, CAt.!fORNfA 

CIIAJIlMIW 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

<lCongre~~ of tue Wniteb ~tate~ 

;!,louse of ~£pr£sentattbes 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 

Opening Statement of Rep. Henry A. Waxman 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce 

National Broadband Plan: Promoting Broadband Adoption 

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet 

May 13,2010 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on the National Broadband Plan's 

recommendations for greater broadband adoption. 

I would first like to extend a welcome to the two Californians on today's panel. Rachelle 

Chong is here on behalf of California's Chieflnformation Officer. And Rivkah Sass is here on 

behalf of the Sacramento Public Library System. Thank you both for being here. 

At our last hearing I mentioned the importance of broadband deployment to America's 

future. Today, we will hear testimony about efforts and proposals designed to address the other 

side of the broadband equation: broadband adoption. To put a number on just how important 

broadband adoption is, according to the Broadband Plan, 62 percent of American workers rely on 

the Internet to perform their jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts that jobs dependent on 

broadband will grow by 25 percent over the next 8 years, or 2 y, times faster than the average 

growth across all occupations and industries. So when we talk about addressing adoption 

barriers, we are talking about addressing barriers to future economic growth and job growth. 

The largest barrier identified by the Broadband Plan is cost. The Plan recommends 

addressing the cost barrier, in part, by expanding the Universal Service Fund's Lifeline and LinkUp program for low-income consumers. Congresswoman Matsui has long recognized that 

expanding Lifeline and Link-Up is an important, common-sense approach to encourage 

broadband adoption. Toward that end, in September oflast year, she introduced H.R. 3646, the 

Broadband Affordability Act. J support her legislation and commend her for her leadership on 

this issue. 

In addition to cost, the Plan identified a lack of digital literacy as a barrier to adoption. 

The Plan recommends promoting digital literacy through volunteer and other efforts to train 

those who need and want help. These proposals are worth pursuing. 
11 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 16 here 76579A.005

Ifwe are going to take full advantage of the benefits that broadband offers to the country, 

we will have to closely examine these two major issues for consumers: costs and digital literacy. 

I want to thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing and our witnesses for being 

here. 

2 
12 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Chairman Waxman. The 

gentleman from Texas, Mr. Barton, the ranking Republican member of the full committee, is recognized for five minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE BARTON, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Mr. BARTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to submit my 

statement for the record. I will just say that I am troubled by what 

the FCC put out last week. I don’t think we need to regulate the 

Internet, and with all due respect to my friends on the majority 

side, I don’t think we need a government program to get more 

broadband deployment. 

Ninety-five percent of American households have access to it, and 

you can question that 5 percent that don’t are generally people that 

live in very rural areas. My guess is they live in rural areas because they want to, and it is at least possible that they don’t really 

want all the encumbrances and accoutrements of the modern Internet age. So even if we force it on them, they probably wouldn’t take 

it. 

Now, obviously there are some that would if it were available, 

but we have a situation where the number of people that have 

Internet capability in their homes have gone from 8 million to 200 

million people. It is similar to what we went through in the ’50s. 

You know televisions weren’t mandated by federal television policy, 

and yet there were more televisions in people’s homes by the 1970s 

than there were telephones where we had a regulated system for 

telephone service and spent lots and lots of money. 

The broadband plan that the FCC put out by itself, Mr. Chair- man, apparently costs $20 million. That is $20 million that could 

have gone to some other purpose. You know the only saying in 

rural Virginia, Mr. Chairman, is the same as it is in Texas. If it 

is not broke, don’t fix it. We have a broadband deployment plan 

right now. It is called free enterprise. 

So I appreciate our witnesses being here. I am sure you all are 

bright, young people and going to give us the benefit of wisdom 

which we don’t have. But this is one problem that—it is a solution, 

Mr. Chairman, looking for a problem that I don’t believe exists. So 

put me down as skeptical. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Barton. So noted. The 

gentlelady from California, Ms. Matsui, has put forward a proposal 

to expand the Lifeline and Linkup programs in order to assist 

broadband adoption, and I join with Chairman Waxman in commending her for her leadership on that matter, and she is now recognized for five minutes—for two minutes. 

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

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Chairman Boucher. Thank you for calling today’s hearing. I would like to also welcome our witnesses. I 

would especially like to welcome Rivkhah Sass who also is one of 

my constituents and director of the Sacramento Public Library Authority. She has done an outstanding job modernizing the Sacramento Public Library system and has been a leading advocate for 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

expanding fast speed broadband access to anchor institutions in 

our committee. I would also like to welcome another Californian, 

Rachelle Chong. 

Although there is a lot of talk today about the FCC, I believe 

there is broad agreement on both sides of the aisle on this committee that broadband adoption is critical to our future economic 

well-being and security. In today’s economy, the Internet has become a necessity, not a luxury. If you don’t have it, you are simply 

at a competitive disadvantage. 

Unfortunately millions of Americans, particularly in these tough 

economic times, simply cannot afford the high cost of in-home 

broadband service and are on the wrong side of a digital divide. 

Several prominent studies by PEW, PPI California, and the FCC 

have strongly suggested that broadband adoption rates are largely 

associated with income levels and the high costs of broadband services. 

In fact, the FCC found that 28 million Americans do not subscribe because of affordability barriers. Last September I did introduce The Broadband Affordability Act that would expand the Universal Service Fund Lifeline Assistance program for universal 

broadband adoption. 

And I certainly appreciate Chairman Waxman and Chairman 

Boucher’s supportive views along with many colleagues on this subcommittee who cosponsored my proposal. It will ensure that all 

Americans living in urban and rural areas will have access to affordable broadband services. I applaud the FCC for including as a 

central recommendation in the National Broadband Plan. And it is 

my hope that any reforms to USF address broadband affordability 

barriers. 

I also believe, as Rivkah has stated in her written testimony, 

that anchor institutions play a critical role in providing access to 

broadband services. Last September, I along with Representatives 

Eshoo and Markey urged NTIA to prioritize second round recovery 

act funding for anchor institutions broadband adoption projects. 

I do look forward to working with my colleagues on ways to continue to increase broadband adoption rates in this country, and I 

yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Ms. Matsui. The gentleman 

from Illinois, Mr. Shimkus, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN SHIMKUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Also put me down as 

skeptical about the FCC engaging in regulating the Internet. I venture that it will also go into taxation, and we all have gotten the 

emails about taxing the Internet. And they are not favorable, and 

I think that is where we will be heading if we allow the FCC to 

move in that direction. 

I appreciate Ms. Chong being here. She has testified before the 

committee before, and I use her testimony and her comments and 

to paraphrase—and you can correct me when you get a chance— 

was basically you need the map before you send money. And that 

is the most efficient way. I have used that numerous times. It 

shows how testimony is important. And that is one part of our frusVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:17 Feb 01, 2013 Jkt 076579 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A579.XXX A579

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

tration with the billions of dollars that have gone out and may not 

be appropriate if you are not—if we don’t identify the real need. 

And we have had this argument. You know I don’t think it was 

settled from the last hearing. I don’t think we have a definition of 

what is underserved. I don’t think we are really effectively appreciating the unserved areas. And with all due respect to those people who run anchor institutions, they may have three different 

choices of high-speed Internet connectivity, and there are areas of 

the country that are left out. 

And I will give an example. We also have Ms. Taylor here from 

the connect issue, and here is a map of southern Illinois. You all 

can’t see it, but it is all colorful, and it highlights all these things. 

And the real problematic areas are the yellow ones or the tan ones 

here. No service, nothing, nada, zip. And we are worried about providing high-speed access to libraries in the city of Chicago? And our 

taxpayer dollars are going there versus just ensuring that some 

areas in our country have some high-speed Internet service. And 

that is the frustrating thing. 

The second frustrating thing is we also are incentivizing 

broadband deployment in competition with services that have already been deployed. I also want to—and I will stop on this, Mr. 

Chairman. Time has gone quick. Is encourage people to look at 

Congressional Quarterly’s last publication, and the author is Keith 

Parent. I don’t know if he is over there, but in June 2000, 34 percent of people had dial-up, 3 percent had broadband. April 2009, 

7 percent had dialup, 63 percent had broadband. 

The market works. We need to incentivize the market to reach 

the unserved. Anything else we are doing is wasting money and 

wasting time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman from 

North Carolina, Mr. Butterfield, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. G.K. BUTTERFIELD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH 

CAROLINA 

Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for 

holding this hearing and thank the witnesses for their testimony 

today. Mr. Chairman, put me down as supportive of this initiative. 

I think it is very appropriate. While we can all understand the benefit and value of broadband cost, literacy and relevance, particularly in poor and minority communities, there are barriers that 

have often been too great to overcome. 

In fact, more than 66 percent of the so-called non-adopters are 

those individuals that have access to broadband but decline to subscribe have cited the cost of it. And so I am somewhat disappointed 

that the ranking member believes that there are some in rural 

communities who do not want to subscribe to broadband, and that 

may be so. But there are some in urban communities as well. 

A recent study found that 22 percent of minorities lack the requisite knowledge and skills necessary to use the Internet. Nearly 

50 percent of those are African-Americans, and they said that they 

do not believe that the content available on the Internet is relevant 

to them. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

I represent the fourth poorest district in America, one-half of 

which is African-American. Many of my constituents are struggling 

to find work and pay for prescription drugs and utility bills and the 

like. And the notion of purchasing a computer, setting it up, and 

paying the monthly fee simply would not cross their mind. And 

that is why I was particularly excited to learn about the BET Network’s collaborative, whose goals are to address and overcome the 

barriers that prevent minority communities from experiencing the 

full benefits of broadband. 

BET will support community-based centers that provide free access to people who need them, provide community outreach and 

training programs, and create interactive programming and online 

life portal that will provide topical, relevant information specifically 

for minority communities. BET, Mr. Chairman, and their partners 

have submitted a round two application for B top funds, and I sincerely hope that NTIA sees its potential for addressing the needs 

of unserved and underserved communities. 

Minority groups, perhaps more than any other, have the most to 

gain from universal broadband adoption. If the barriers remain in 

place, the digital divide will only widen, and more people will be 

left forever behind. 

Finally, I must also mention that I am deeply concerned about 

reclassifying broadband from Title I to Title II. In doing so, the 

FCC risk adding more barriers to adoption by discouraging private 

network deployment and expansion. If the FCC moves any further 

in this direction, I believe Congress must act, and I know many of 

my colleagues share the same concern. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to go over. This concludes my remarks. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Butterfield. The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Latta, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO 

Mr. LATTA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Stearns. Thank you for holding this subcommittee hearing on 

the National Broadband Plan and the adoption. Today broadband, 

as has been stated a little earlier, is available in 95 percent of 

those households with just 67 percent of those household subscribing. According to the Connected Nation’s 2009 research, the 

number is slightly lower in my home state of Ohio as well as there 

is in Tennessee with only 60 percent of household in these two 

states adopting service in their homes. 

The number of resident users is up to 200 million from 8 million 

just 10 years ago as has also been pointed out. Under the NBP, the 

survey found that 36 percent of the nonadopters cite cost as the 

primary barrier to the adoption at home. 

The government’s nonregulatory approach has helped the private 

sector make broadband available in 95 percent of the country. 

Many industry stakeholders have programs available to assist with 

adoption, and private industry has invested billions of their own 

capital to expand services and assist with that adoption. 

Additionally, the federal government needs to exercise fiscal restraint, and there should be no further tax dollars spent on any 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

new government program for adoption when there already has 

been funding allocated for these purposes. Through the tools already available to the FCC for adoption through the NBP, private 

partnerships will be part of the equation. Groups such as Connected Nation have made important strides in improving 

broadband education and adoption. 

As in many parts of Ohio, as in my district, which is rural in 

parts, there are many individuals who lack broadband adoption. As 

the Connected Nation policy brief shows, rural residents and businesses lag behind that of their non-rural counterparts. 

In order to ensure that these residents and businesses reduce the 

barriers to adoption, the tools already accessible to the government 

should be used for building awareness about the benefits of 

broadband services and the benefits that it brings to the residents 

and businesses. 

In Ohio, Connected Nation has been a key component of raising 

awareness at the grass roots level employing public and private 

partnerships across the state. Adoption is the report in issue. I will 

look forward to working with the subcommittee on these issues. I 

have looked through the funds that have already been allocated 

through these efforts and through public and private partnerships. 

There will be sufficient progress made to really improve adoption. 

However while the FCC is focusing on these issues relating to 

adoption which will bring jobs and economic development to rural 

areas, I believe it is counterproductive for it to focus on the policy 

areas where the FCC has questionable authority. 

I have very serious concerns with the recent announcement of 

the FCC to reclassify broadband services as a phone service under 

Title II of the Communications Act. This will have a detrimental 

effect on the economy and free market principles of our Nation’s 

economy. I urge the FCC to immediately stop this action. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much and yield 

back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
17 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 76579A.006

Congressman Robert E. Latta 

The Committee on Energy & Commerce 

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology & the Internet 

Opening Statement - For the Record 

May 13,2010 

MR. CHAIRMAN; RANKING MEMBER STEARNS: Thank you for 

holding this subcommittee hearing on the National Broadband Plan and plan 

adoption. Today broadband is available to 95% of households, with just 67% of 

those households subscribing. According to Connected Nation's 2009 research, 

that number is slightly lower in my home state of Ohio, as well as in Tennessee, 

with only 60% of households in these 2 states adopting service in their homes. The 

number of residential users is up to 200 million, from 8 million users just 10 years 

ago. Under the NBP, the survey found that 36% of non-adopters cite cost as the 

primary barrier to the adoption at home. 

The government's non-regulatory approach has helped the private sector 

make broadband available to 95% of the country. Many industry stakeholders 

have programs available to assist with adoption, and private industry has invested 

billions of their own capital to expand services and assist with adoption. 

Additionally, the federal government needs to exercise fiscal restraint, and there 

should be no further tax dollars spent on any new government programs for 

adoption when there has already been funding allocated for these purposes. 

Through the tools already available to the FCC for adoption through the 

NBP, public-private partnerships must be a part of the equation. Groups such as 
18 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 23 here 76579A.007

Connected Nation, have made important strides in improving broadband education 

and adoption. As in many parts of Ohio, my District is very rural and there are 

many individuals that lack broadband adoption. As the Connected Nation policy 

brief shows, rural residents and businesses lag behind that of their non-rural 

counterparts. In order to ensure that these residents and businesses reduce the 

barriers to adoption, the tools already accessible to the government should be used 

for building awareness about the benefits of broadband services and the benefits it 

brings to residents and businesses. In Ohio, Connected Nation has been a key 

component of raising awareness at the grassroots level and forming public-private 

partnerships across the state. I look forward to hearing Ms. Taylor's testimony that 

discusses the positive difference Connected Nation has made in Ohio and across 

the country. 

Adoption is a very important issue, and I look forward to working with the 

Subcommittee on these issues. I believe through the funds that have already been 

allocated for these efforts, and through public-private partnerships, there will be 

significant progress made to greatly improve adoption. However, while the FCC is 

focusing on these issues relating to adoption which will bring jobs and economic 

development to rural areas, I believe it is counterproductive for it to focus on 

policy areas where the FCC has questionable authority. I have very serious 

concerns with the recent announcement by the FCC to reclassify broadband service 

2 
19 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 24 here 76579A.008

as a phone service under Title II of the Communications Act. This will have 

detrimental effects on the economy and the free market principles of our nation's 

economy. I urge the FCC to immediately stop this action. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I look forward to hearing the testimony from 

the witnesses on the panel today. [Yield Back] 

3 
20 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Latta. The gentleman 

from Nebraska—Mr. Griffith has returned. Mr. Griffith, are you 

prepared for your statement? You are recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PARKER GRIFFITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank 

the chairman and ranking member for calling this hearing today 

and also thank all the witnesses for your willingness to testify before this committee. 

The National Broadband Plan suggests that roughly 80 million 

Americans do not have access at home. Broadband access is vitally 

important to our democracy and to public safety. It is becoming the 

main gateway for Americans to apply for jobs, apply to colleges, 

and more and more people are using it as their main source of information and news throughout the day. 

The FCC’s broadband plan also cites that some segments of the 

population, mainly low-income households, minorities, seniors, 

rural residents, and others are being left behind. I recognize the 

importance of broadband, and over the last two decades, we have 

seen a spike in access to now over 200 million. 

With respect to this hearing, I believe we need to ask ourselves 

what can policymakers do to actually promote broadband adoption. 

Policies in the National Broadband Plan such as reforming the 

USF and pushing spectrum out to those who are delivering 

broadband consumers are areas we can work on. However, I was 

concerned to learn of Chairman Genachowski’s recent intention regarding the reclassification. This third way being proposed will 

suppress investment and the very innovation that has brought us 

to the point where we are today. 

I know and I feel certain with the suggestions of the chairman 

and ranking member that we will be able to reach an agreement, 

and a good bill could be developed and presented to the Congress. 

I know this hearing is on adoption and not net neutrality or reclassification. Nonetheless, adoption is certainly an important 

issue, and I am glad we are holding this hearing today. Again I 

thank you for your time today, and I will look forward to hearing 

your testimony and return the balance of my time. Thank you. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Mr. Griffith. The gentleman from 

Vermont, Mr. Welch, is recognized for two minutes. 

Mr. WELCH. I just want to thank you for calling the hearing. I 

look forward to the testimony. Incredibly important issue. Got to 

work out the balance between making access available to everyone, 

but also having the wherewithal to invest so that we can build up 

the network. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Welch. The gentleman 

from Nebraska, Mr. Terry, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LEE TERRY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA 

Mr. TERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your 

comments stating the necessity to move our bill. It was just a 

month ago when the FCC was admonished by the D.C. Circuit for 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 

attempting to exceed the authority provided to them by this Congress. 

It is beyond disturbing to me that rather than learn from that 

ruling, the FCC is now apparently about to embark on an even 

more egregious abuse of its statutory authority which will no doubt 

only result in years of litigation while also preventing future investment in this private sector. They have definitely encroached 

into our legislative arena. 

I would like to thank our ranking member Mr. Stearns for introducing his bill to block the FCC from regulating basic aspects of 

broadband Internet services unless the agency first reports to us 

that there is a market failure. I am the cosponsor of that bill. 

As we all know, Congress specifically differentiated between information services and telecommunication services in the Communications Act because Congress intended for information services to 

be widely regulated and for telecommunications services to be subject to greater scrutiny. This is because there was a presumption 

in 1996 that telecommunications services were provided largely in 

a monopoly environment. 

It concerns me that broadband is now going to be regulated by 

the FCC, and whether it is a heavy touch or light touch, I am not 

sure we know the difference. We do know that this will allow or 

under the FCC’s power grab and their intended use of that power 

that the Internet will be regulated by them. Congress needs to 

stand up, take back its power from the FCC, and deal with this 

issue. I yield back our time. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Mr. Terry. The gentlelady from California, Ms. Eshoo, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ANNA G. ESHOO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for continuing what I 

think is this essential review of the FCC’s National Broadband 

Plan. We are examining today the impediments to full deployment 

and the issues that are preventing some Americans from using 

broadband while others seem to reap all of its benefits. 

We know that the primary reason for the digital divide is—guess 

what—what is usually at the base of almost anything—money. 

Those who have it also have the access. And those that don’t are 

left behind. So that is why I am cosponsoring Representative Matsui’s bill to extend the Universal Service Fund’s Lifeline and Linkup programs to broadband users. We need to move ahead to ensure 

that our neediest Americans receive this essential service. 

There are some concepts and ideas for closing the digital divide 

that are barely touched upon in the National Broadband Plan. The 

state of California, for instance, is a proponent of smart housing 

broadband deployment to give people in public housing equal Internet access, and I expect that Rachelle Chong, who has done so 

much to improve access in California, is going to talk about this in 

her testimony. 

I think we also need to focus on two other parts of the entry 

problem: education and the perceived lack of potential users—lack 

of relevance to potential users which are actually interconnected. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

And I am very pleased that the director of Sacramento’s public library system is here to talk to us about anchor institutions. 

So all in all, Mr. Chairman, I don’t think that we can allow anything to stand in the way of bringing all of our citizens into the 

broadband world. Our economic, educational, and social future really depends upon our success in this effort. So I look forward to 

hearing from the distinguished panelists today, and I yield back. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Ms. Eshoo. The gentlelady from Tennessee, Ms. Blackburn, is recognized for 2 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to our 

witnesses. We are looking forward to hearing from you. I will have 

to say with 95 percent deployment and 67 percent adoption rates, 

I think that any rational observer would agree that we do not have 

a significant deployment or adoption problem in this country. 

That being said, I am glad we are always looking for ways to improve the progress. I think that the debate is going to continue 

around does the government need to be patrolling that, or is it best 

left to the private sector? 

Now I will say that I am pleased that the adoption—increased 

adoption rate over the past three years in Tennessee has outpaced 

the national average by 2 percentage points, and we continue to see 

great gains. And innovation and job creation are a big part of this, 

and we would like to make certain that that remains. It is important that we look at issues such as cost and digital literacy, but we 

must keep focused on what is really important, and that would be 

maintaining a system and an infrastructure that is free from government overregulation. 

I do have my legislation, H.R. 3924, that would block the FCC 

from implementing their version of net neutrality, or as I like to 

term it fairness doctrine for the Internet. We must continue to promote job innovation and job creation in the telecommunications industry. For this reason, I am excited to explore a little deeper what 

exactly the FCC could possibly be thinking and how they rationalize this ill-conceived notion of reclassifying the Internet under 

Title II of the Telecommunications Act. 

I don’t understand why we want to disincentivize Internet service providers from creating those jobs and from maintaining those 

networks at a time when they are spending $60 billion annually investing in it. And we are talking about the loss of jobs, and unemployment is at 9.9 percent. This is so counterintuitive it makes one 

wonder what the real motive is. 

Thank you for the hearing. Welcome the witnesses. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Ms. Blackburn. The gentleman from 

Ohio, Mr. Space, is recognized for two minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ZACHARY T. SPACE, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO 

Mr. SPACE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing, 

and I would like to thank our witnesses and welcome you to the 

hearing today. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
23 

One of the cruel ironies about broadband adoption is that those 

folks who are most in need of everything that the Internet and 

broadband offer are the least likely to appreciate that need. And 

we see that problem as especially glaring in rural Ohio, rural 

America. And certainly educating the general public on the benefits 

of access is a big part of what we need to do, I think, as a Congress 

and driving policy and certainly as an administration in driving 

policy. 

But for us, the people back in southeastern Ohio, the problem, 

the primary problem remains excess. And recognize that awareness 

is important. Affordability is important. Maintaining good quality 

is important. But none of that matters if we don’t have access. And 

access for us means not just creating a stronger economic environment, which it will do, but it means bridging these gaps that exist 

between our access not just to technology but to health care and 

education, that the role of broadband really is still in its infancy 

in how it integrates with those fields but will, without question, become much more predominant. 

I want to thank Connect Ohio and Connected Nation for the 

great work they have done in really overcoming the first hurdle, 

and that is mapping. We need to figure out where we have 

broadband access and where we don’t, and Connect Ohio has done 

a terrific job in pinpointing that. And I am proud to say that they 

have been one of the Nation’s leaders, and I certainly want to 

thank Ms. Taylor for her reference in her testimony to some of the 

local solutions that are happening in counties like Coshocton County where they face some significant challenges. 

I look forward to your testimony, and again thank you for your 

hard work on these issues. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Space. The members 

of the subcommittee have had an opportunity to share their views 

with you. Now, we would like to hear your views expressed to us. 

We have five outstanding witnesses this morning, and I will simply 

say a brief word of introduction about each. 

Ms. Carol Mattey is the deputy chief of the Wireline Competition 

Bureau for the Federal Communications Commission and participated in the formulation of the National Broadband Plan. Ms. 

Rachelle Chong is the special counsel in the office of the chief information officer for the state of California. We know her on this subcommittee from her previous tenure as a distinguished member of 

the Federal Communications Commission. Ms. Rivkah Sass is the 

director of the Sacramento Public Library System and is also testifying today on behalf of the American Library Association, an organization for which I have great affection. Mr. Howie Hodges is the 

senior vice president of government affairs at One Economy, and 

Ms. Laura Taylor is the chief policy officer of Connected Nation, 

which played a major role in constructing broadband maps across 

the United States. 

We welcome each of you, and without objection, your prepared 

written statements will be incorporated in our record. We would 

welcome your oral summaries and ask that you keep those to approximately five minutes. Ms. Mattey, we will be happy to begin 

with you. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

Hold that microphone as close as you can, and be sure to turn 

it on. I think it is off. Very good. 

STATEMENTS OF CAROL MATTEY, DEPUTY CHIEF, WIRELINE 

COMPETITION BUREAU, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; RACHELLE CHONG, SPECIAL COUNSEL, CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER; 

RIVKAH SASS, DIRECTOR, SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY 

SYSTEM; C. HOWIE HODGES II, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, 

GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, ONE ECONOMY; AND LAURA TAYLOR, CHIEF POLICY OFFICER, CONNECTED NATION 

STATEMENT OF CAROL MATTEY 

Ms. MATTEY. Chairman Boucher, Ranking Member Stearns, 

members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the National Broadband Plan’s recommendations 

to promote broadband adoption and utilization. Through the Recovery Act, Congress called on the FCC to develop a plan that would 

ensure that all people in the United States have access to 

broadband capability and establish benchmarks for meeting that 

goal, include a detailed strategy for achieving affordability and 

maximum utilization of broadband infrastructure and services, and 

include a plan for the use of broadband in advancing consumer welfare, civic participation, education, health care, public safety, job 

training, economic growth, and other national purposes. 

In response, the plan includes a goal that every American should 

have affordable access to robust broadband service and the means 

and the skills to subscribe if they choose. The plan outlines a pathway to increase home broadband adoption rates from 65 percent 

today to higher than 90 percent by 2020, and to narrow significantly the differences among demographic groups. 

This is an important and ambitious goal. It took us 30 years to 

get from roughly 60 percent to 90 percent adoption for telephony. 

We are proposing to cover just as much ground in a third of the 

time. The plan sets forth a number of recommendations on how to 

achieve this goal guided by several overarching principles. 

First we must focus on broadband adoption in the home. Public 

access, though essential, is not a substitute for home access, and 

the Nation will not realize the full benefits of broadband unless 

policies focus on increasing adoption in the home. 

Second, adoption alone is not the end game. Getting people online is a critical first step, but ultimately the value of broadband 

to an individual depends on how fully it is utilized. 

And finally, adoption programs should be targeted, local, measurable, able to evolve as technology evolves, and collaborative. Targeted solutions address specific barriers to adoption and direct resources at populations less likely to be online. To address the cost 

barrier, the plan recommends expanding the FCC’s existing low income universal service program known as Lifeline and Linkup to 

support broadband. To address digital literacy barriers, the plan 

calls for creation of a digital literacy core, bolstering the capacity 

of libraries and community centers, and the creation of an online 

skills portal. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

And to address relevance, the plan recommends partnerships between the public, private, nonprofit, and philanthropic sectors 

which can help provide comprehensive solutions and who can provide targeted outreach and awareness campaigns. 

The plan also includes several recommendations to address the 

unique difficulties for people with disabilities and in recognition of 

the sovereign status of tribes, which are described further in my 

written testimony. Local solutions are essential because tribal, 

state, and local governments can and should develop and implement specific programs to meet their unique needs. 

The decision to subscribe is an individual one, but the path to 

full adoption unfolds in homes, libraries, schools, and community 

organizations in neighborhoods around the country. Public access 

sites are essential to building the social infrastructure needed to 

promote adoption and utilization in the home. To encourage local 

solutions, the plan recommends continuing federal support for state 

and local broadband initiatives under the Broadband Data Improvement Act. 

To ensure sustainable adoption, program outcomes and policies 

should be measured and should evolve as technology evolves. Unfortunately, despite over a decade of effort focused on bridging the 

digital divide, data of what works best to stimulate adoption and 

utilization are scarce. The plan suggests that future appropriations 

for broadband adoption include specific requirements and funding 

for third-party evaluations and assessment. 

Finally, to catalyze additional collaboration, the plan recommends establishment of a national best practices clearinghouse, 

which can help all stakeholders learn from current investments 

and from each other to inform future policies. The FCC has already 

started implementing those recommendations within its jurisdiction. 

Just last week, the FCC adopted an order asking the federalstate joint board on universal service to prepare recommendations 

regarding the commission’s eligibility, verification and outreach 

rules for both the Lifeline and Linkup program. We also plan to 

host a roundtable discussion to discuss potential pilot programs to 

identify the most efficient and effective long term broadband support mechanism for low-income Americans. 

Many significant adoption recommendations will require action 

by Congress and other governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders. I and others at the FCC look forward to providing additional assistance. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mattey follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 32 76579A.009

Written Statement of 

Carol Mattey 

Deputy Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau 

Federal Communications Commission 

"The National Broadband Plan: Promoting Broadband Adoption" 

Hearing before the 

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet 

United States House of Representatives 

May 13, 2010 

Chainnan Boucher, Ranking Member Steams, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today about recommendations in the National Broadband Plan 

aimed at promoting broadband adoption and utilization. 

Through the Recovery Act, Congress called on the FCC to develop a broadband plan that 

would "ensure that all people of the United States have access to broadband capability and 

establish benchmarks for meeting that goal. .. include a detailed strategy for achieving 

affordability of such service and maximum utilization of broadband infrastructure and service by 

the public ... and include a plan for the use of broadband infrastructure and services in 

advancing consumer welfare, civic participation, public safety and homeland security, 

community development, health care delivery, energy independence and efficiency, education, 

worker training, private sector investment, entrepreneurial activity, job creation and economic 

growth, and other national purposes." 

In response to the congressional mandate, the National Broadband Plan includes a goal 

that every American should have affordable access to robust broadband service, and the means 

and skills to subscribe if they choose. The Plan outlines a pathway to increase home broadband 

adoption rates from 65% today to higher than 90% by 2020 and to narrow significantly 

differences among demographic groups. This is an important and ambitious goal -- for instance, 

1 
27 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 33 76579A.010

it took 30 years to get from roughly 60% to 90% adoption for telephone. We are proposing to 

cover just as much ground in a third of the time. 

The Plan sets forth a number of recommendations for how to achieve this goal, guided by 

several overarching principles. First, we must focus on increasing broadband adoption in the 

home. Public access, while essential, is not a substitute for home access, and the nation will not 

realize the full benefits of broadband unless public policies focus on increasing adoption in the 

home. Second, adoption alone is not the end game. Getting people online is the critical first 

step, but ultimately the value of broadband to an individual depends on how fully it is utilized. 

And finally, adoption programs and policies should be targeted, local, measurable, able to evolve 

as technology evolves, and collaborative. 

Targeted solutions address specific barriers to adoption and direct resources at 

populations less likely to be online. While the Plan refers to the three main categories of barriers 

- cost, digital literacy and relevance - it is important to note that each category encompasses 

several discrete barriers. For example, "cost" may refer to the cost of monthly service, the cost 

of hardware (such as a computer or mobile phone), or other barriers associated with an 

individual's inability to enter into a long-term contract. To address the cost barrier, the Plan 

recommends expanding the FCC's existing low income Universal Service program, known as 

Lifeline and Link Up, to support broadband. To address digital literacy barriers, the Plan calls 

for a three-part National Digital Literacy Program, which would include: creation of a Digital 

Literacy Corps, increasing the capacity of libraries and community centers to provide public 

access points, and creation of an Online Skills portal for free basic digital skills training. And, 

to address relevance, the Plan recommends partnerships between the public, private, non-profit 

and philanthropic sectors, which can help provide comprehensive solutions that combine 

2 
28 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 34 76579A.011

hardware, service, training and content, and by conducting outreach and awareness campaigns 

that target underserved communities. 

People with disabilities face the same barriers to adoption and utilization as the rest of the 

population, but also face additional impediments. For example, devices often are not designed to 

be accessible for people with disabilities, assistive technologies like Braille displays are 

expensive, Internet-based video programming often does not have captions or video descriptions 

offering an account of what is on the screen, and some services, including emergency services, 

are not directly accessible. To address the unique difficulties faced by people with disabilities, 

the Plan recommends that the Executive branch convene a Broadband Accessibility Working 

Group to coordinate federal efforts to maximize accessibility. The Plan also recommends that to 

make government a model for accessibility, the FCC should establish an Accessibility and 

Innovation Forum, and that Congress, the FCC and the Department of Justice should modernize 

accessibility laws and rules to ensure that services, equipment and content are accessible and 

affordable for people with disabilities. 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages face significant barriers to adoption. 

Given the unique sovereign status of Tribal Nations and the disparity in existing infrastructure 

and available data, the Plan makes additional recommendations to increase broadband adoption, 

as well as broadband deployment, on Tribal lands. The Plan also recognizes the similar needs of 

Native Hawaiian Homelands. The Plan emphasizes the need to improve coordination and 

consultation between Tribes and federal government through a series of recommendations, 

including the formation of a FCC-Native Nations Broadband Task Force, the creation of an FCC 

Office of Native American Affairs, and the establishment of a Tribal seat on the USAC Board of 

Directors and on the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service. The Plan also includes 

3 
29 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 35 76579A.012

other recommendations, such as improving the quality of data relating to broadband on Tribal 

lands and technical training for Tribes. 

Local solutions are essential because Tribal, state and local governments can and should 

develop and implement specific programs to meet their unique needs and promote connectivity 

across entire communities. The decision to subscribe to broadband service is an individual one, 

but the path to full adoption and utilization is social. It unfolds in homes, libraries, schools and 

community organizations in neighborhoods around the country. 

Public access sites are essential to building the social infrastructure needed to promote 

adoption and utilization in the home. Local solutions that promote community connectivity also 

help promote a culture of use that can help make broadband more relevant to a community and 

give people an opportunity to learn an unfamiliar technology, in the right environment and with 

the content, technology and teachers that can bring it all together for them. To encourage state 

and local action, the Plan recommends continuing federal support for state and local broadband 

initiatives, as envisioned by Section 106 of the Broadband Data Improvement Act. This support 

will allow state and local governments to develop more targeted plans to address the unique 

barriers their citizens face. The Plan suggests this funding come from existing appropriations, 

but should additional appropriations be made available, the Plan also recommends expanding 

eligibility to ensure that Tribal Nations are eligible to apply for grants. 

To ensure sustainable adoption, program outcomes and policies should constantly be 

measured and evolve as technology evolves. Success cannot be determined without investing in 

on-going, effective measurement and evaluation from the beginning. Unfortunately, despite 

more than a decade of efforts focused on bridging the digital divide, data on what works best to 

stimulate adoption and utilization are scarce. The Plan suggests that future federal appropriations 

4 
30 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 36 76579A.013

for broadband adoption include specific requirements and funding for third-party evaluations and 

assessment. Each grant should include funding for program evaluation, with additional funding 

to conduct in-depth assessments and longitudinal program assessment. 

The federal government clearly has a role to play in promoting broadband adoption, but 

federal efforts alone are not enough, which is why the Plan's recommendations build around the 

principle of collaboration. To catalyze additional collaboration and knowledge sharing, the Plan 

recommends the establishment of a National Best Practices Clearinghouse. A National Best 

Practices Clearinghouse would help all stakeholders take advantage of the current momentum in 

this area to learn from current investments and from each other to inform future policy and 

programmatic decisions. 

The FCC has already started implementing those recommendations within its jurisdiction. 

Just last week, the FCC adopted an order asking the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal 

Service to review and prepare recommendations regarding the Commission's eligibility, 

verification and outreach rules for the Lifeline and Link-Up programs. We also plan to host a 

roundtable discussion to discuss potential pilot programs to identifY the most efficient and 

effective long-term broadband support mechanism for low-income Americans. 

Many significant adoption recommendations are outside the jurisdiction of the FCC, 

however, and will require action by Congress, executive branch agencies, state and local 

governments, and other non-governmental stakeholders. I, and others at the FCC, look forward 

to providing additional assistance where we can be helpful. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testifY this morning. 
31 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Ms. Mattey. Ms. Chong. 

STATEMENT OF RACHELLE CHONG 

Ms. CHONG. Good morning. It is a great pleasure to be back here 

in Washington, my old stomping grounds. It is even more of a 

pleasure that today your topic is broadband adoption, one that is 

very pivotal to bridging the digital divide. 

The digital divide cannot be closed without California. We have 

44,000 square miles of unserved area, the size of Kentucky. We 

have 1.4 million rural residents without access, the population of 

Maine. We have 12.9 million urban residents not connected, the 

population of Illinois. We have 1.9 million people with disabilities 

not connected, the population of New Mexico. We have 68,000 Native Americans not connected, the population of Alaska. So the 

number of unconnected Californians on the other side of the digital 

divide is the equivalent of having five other states within our 

boundaries. 

And this is why California has been working with great focus 

and with great effort on broadband adoption since 2006. We were 

very early to develop a cohesive policy to spur broadband investment in our state. Beginning in 2006, our governor issued a 

broadband executive order and formed a taskforce. We first performed broadband mapping, which was important to find out where 

broadband was and where it wasn’t. We then had a legislature who 

passed a digital infrastructure and video competition act. They let 

telephone companies offer video. They allowed cable companies to 

have a statewide video franchise license. 

The PUC then attacked the access problem. We formed a—excuse me. We allowed our telephone companies to have updated 

rules so that they could compete with their competitors, which are 

now cable, satellite, and wireless. 

So in summary, California set the table for our state’s broadband 

hunger. So we attacked two problems. We started with access, and 

then we went to adoption and awareness. I won’t talk much about 

infrastructure today, but I will say that we had a state infrastructure program to fill in unserved and underserved areas. 

Further we went after a FCC rural pilot program for health care. 

We got a $22 million grant. We have matched it with $8 million 

of nonfederal funding, and we now are beginning construction this 

summer on a statewide broadband telehealth network. We have 

863 sites already authorized to push broadband out into our most 

rural areas. 

Now, if you build it, they will come. It might be true in baseball, 

but it sure isn’t true in adoption. We know that even though we 

can get broadband access to our residents, that some of them won’t 

use it. We formed a nonprofit organization in 2006, the California 

Emerging Technology Fund. And I brought copies of their annual 

report, which is very instructive, and I urge you to pick up a copy. 

They have been focusing on broadband adoption. They figured out 

who is on the wrong side in my state, Latinos, African-Americans, 

low-income families, seniors, people with disabilities, people who 

live in rural and remote counties. And then we focused precisely on 

those unconnected groups using a number of strategies. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
32 

One, we got our civic leaders engaged. They have been going out 

and talking to our chambers of commerce, our local mayors, the librarian, anyone who is a leader. And we formed consortiums in the 

rural regions and the urban regions to aggregate demand, to encourage broadband deployment in their areas, and to support important applications that push broadband out, telemedicine, teleeducation, e-government. 

Second, we gave money out using what we call venture philosophy engagement. We chose 52 governmental—I am sorry, nonprofit and community-based organizations who already had expertise in technology. And we asked them to reach in to those vulnerable communities and grow their programs. We hold these groups 

to very rigorous measurement and evaluation standards. They 

meet once a year with CETF, and we told them every program they 

had must be accessible to people with disabilities. 

Our third strategy is public awareness. We have been using a big 

public awareness campaign to enhance awareness of broadband. In 

short, why broadband makes your life better. Our major effort here 

is a get connected campaign. It increases adoption among low-income persons. 

Our fourth strategy was public policy initiatives. Our major initiative was school to home. We have launched this program, which 

is a statewide program to close the achievement gap in the digital 

divide. We are going to take the worst performing 500 middle 

schools in California. We will provide a small laptop computer to 

every child who cannot afford a computer. They are encouraged to 

take it home so that they will teach their parents how to use and 

connect to the Internet. They are going to also train the parents, 

six hours mandatory, so that they understand cybersecurity issues 

and how to connect to the parents and the principal of the school. 

We will be supporting the teachers by 24 hours of training on 

how to integrate the computer into education, and we will also be 

training the principals on how to access a content-rich Web site 

with educational materials. This is a very ambitious program, but 

we have two pilots already running in California, in Los Angeles 

and Riverside. We hope to start 20 more schools in the fall and 

eventually reach all 500 low performing schools. 

I wanted to also quickly mention smart housing. We think this 

is an area that unfortunately was left out of the FCC national plan. 

What we mean by smart housing is a publicly-funded housing development project that possesses an independent, advanced-communications network which will drive economies of scale to bring 

the residents in those small houses broadband at a reduced cost. 

We have developed in California a model policy, and we hope 

that this will be available to the federal agencies. Thank you for 

inviting me. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Chong follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 40 76579A.014

Testimony of Rachelle Chong 

Special Counsel, Advanced Information and Communications Technology, 

Office of the Chief Information Officer, State of California 

Before Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce 

May 13, 2010 - 10 AM 

It is a great honor and pleasure to be back in Washington D.C. It is even more of a pleasure that your 

topic today is broadband adoption and awareness, a vitally important area that is pivotal to bridging the 

Digital Divide. 

The Digital Divide cannot be closed without California. We have 44,000 square miles of unserved area, 

the size of Kentucky. We have 1.4 million rural residents without access, the population of Maine. We 

have 12.9 million urban residents not connected, the population of Illinois. We have 1.9 million people 

with disabilities not connected, the population of New Mexico. We have 68,000 Native Americans not 

connected, the population of Alaska. So the number of "unconnected" Californians on the other side of 

the Digital Divide is the equivalent to having five other states inside our boundaries. This is why 

California has been working with great focus and effort on broadband adoption since 2006. 

California was early to develop a cohesive policy to spur broadband innovation in our state. Beginning in 

2006, Governor Schwarzenegger issued a Broadband Executive Order and formed a Broadband Task 

Force on which I was honored to serve. The Task Force performed broadband mapping to identify 

where broadband was -- and where it wasn't -- in our geographically large state. Our legislature passed 

a Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 to allow telephone companies to offer video 

for the first time, and for cable providers to obtain a statewide video franchise and relieve them from 

burdensome local franchise obligations. The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) updated 

outdated telephone rules to allow our largest incumbent phone companies to compete on a level 

playing field with its new competitors, the cable, satellite and wireless companies. In summary, 

California set the table for broadband providers to come to dinner and feed our State's broadband 

hunger. 

California attacked two main problems: (1) lack of broadband infrastructure and (2) broadband 

adoption and awareness. I won't talk about infrastructure much today, but the California PUC 

established a state infrastructure grant program to fill in unserved and underserved areas. This fund has 

been successful in filling in some of our infrastructure gaps, and the Broadband ARRA funds are very 

welcome to assist us in that effort. Further, California received an FCC Rural Health Care Pilot Program 

grant of $22 million, matched it with another $8 million from non federal sources, and is now beginning 

construction this summer on a statewide broadband tele-health network. We believe this 863 site telehealth network will push broadband infrastructure into many of our neediest rural areas and help bring 

access to more Californians. 

"If you build it, they will come" may apply in baseball's field of dreams, but it does not apply to 

broadband. Once we get broadband access to our residents and businesses, California realized that it 
34 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 41 76579A.015

did not mean our people would use it. Who had access to broadband but wasn't using it? Why weren't 

they using it? In 2006, the California PUC formed a non-profit organization, the California Emerging 

Technology Fund (CETF), to assist us in broadband adoption and awareness work. After research, we 

identified the following groups that were on the wrong side of the Digital Divide: Latino families, low 

income families, people with disabilities, and rural and remote communities with no access or very little 

access. We made these groups the focus of our broadband adoption and awareness efforts. 

There are five overarching strategic actions that we have used to bridge the Digital Divide in California. 

They are: 

Civic leader Engagement 

• Venture Philosophy Engagement 

Public Policy Initiatives 

Public Awareness 

Strategic Partnerships 

Civic leader Engagement 

First, we have engaged civic leaders and elected officials to urge residents to "Get Connected". For our 

rural and remote communities, we found community leaders from seven rural regional consortia 

covering 35 counties. We have helped these rural groups to aggregate demand, encourage broadband 

deployment in their area, and to support applications like telemedicine and eGovernment. Similarly in 

our urban underserved areas, we located community leaders to form an urban collaborative to help 

them develop strategies and programs to bring broadband to their neediest residents. 

Venture Philosophy Engagement 

Second, we have used Venture Philosophy Grantmaking, meaning we choose 52 non profit and 

community-based organizations with experience in technology related programs area to reach into our 

most vulnerable communities and perform broadband awareness and adoption work. We hold these 

groups to rigorous measures of performance and support them with a matching grant and annual best 

practices meetings. 

Public Policy Initiatives 

Third, we used public policy initiatives to quicken broadband adoption. One of our most significant is 

the California Telehealth Network, which I previously mentioned. We believe the California Telehealth 

Network will transform health care in our state, particularly in rural areas. Major issues that need to be 

addressed to make telehealth successful include changing reimbursement policies for doctor services via 

telemedicine, immediate FCC reform of the existing Internet Access Fund with a new Health Care 

Broadband Access fund as set forth in Chapter 10 of the FCC National Broadband Plan, and ensuring 

customer privacy of medical records through secure and interoperable systems. 

A. School2Home 

Another major initiative launched by CETF and The Children's Partnership has been our School2Home 

program. School2Home is an innovative statewide program to close both the Achievement Gap and the 

Digital Divide by integrating the use of laptop computers and broadband technology into teaching and 

2 
35 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 42 76579A.016

learning at 539 low performing middle schools throughout California. These low performing schools 

serve high percentages of students of color from low income households, the two demographic groups 

most at risk of low achievement and failure to graduate from high school. By focusing on these schools, 

School2Home targets students who are statistically less likely to perform well in school and more likely 

to lack access to home digital tools than their peers in high performing schools. 

The program has three goals: (1) Increase digital literacy and educational performance among targeted 

low performing middle schools; (2) Improve their 21st Century skills so they can contribute to a more 

competitive workforce upon graduation; and (3) Get parents involved in by home-based digital 

technologies and in turn expand broadband adoption. 

Computer programs have been done before and some computers ended up in closets because teachers 

would not integrate them into schoolwork or the PC style computers had to be shared. In 

School2Home, portable laptop computers are used and home broadband connectivity is emphasized. 

We want the laptops to go home with the child, so that homework can be done and Internet research 

performed. Further, the low income family gains computer access for other urgent needs like 

healthcare information, the ability to apply for a job on the Web, and using Voice Over Internet Protocol 

to stay connected to loved ones abroad. School2Home emphasizes parental involvement, including six 

hours of required parental training so that the parent can use the computer to interact with their child's 

teachers and school to check on progress. Teachers are also trained to engage their students in 

interactive lessons using the computers. 

School2Home Program components: 

• School leaders assess technology needs and develop their plan. 

• All students receive a computer device for classroom and home use. 

• Classroom technology like SMART boards, digital projectors, printers/scanners and document cameras 

enhance the functionality of the computing devices used by teachers and students. 

• All teachers receive 24 hours of professional development focused on incorporating technology into 

classroom instruction and communication with parents. 

• Technology coaches at each school site provide real time embedded professional development and 

teacher support. 

• A student technology program allows students to earn digital literacy certificates and help provide 

basic school site tech support to their families, teachers and fellow students. 

We have two schools beta testing all program components now, and 25 schools preparing for 

participation next school year. We have a seven year timeframe to try and reach all 539 middle schools. 

We will reach 52,000 students, 78,000 parents, 3,100 teachers, and 250 principals and other school 

executives in the first 3 years. 

B. Smart Housing 

Another public policy initiative we are working on is Smart Housing. For some reason, the FCC 

inadvertently left this out of the National Broadband Plan recommendations. Smart Housing is defined 

3 
36 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 43 76579A.017

as a publicly funded housing development project that possesses an independent Advanced 

Communications Network to drive economies of scale that can result in a significantly reduced cost basis 

for residents. This Advanced Communications Network is in addition to standard cable and 

infrastructure used for power, television and telephone service. A model policy has been developed, 

and CETF and the California Department of Housing and Community Development jointly requested that 

the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) amend federal policies and regulations to 

support Smart Housing. 

C. Smart Communities 

We have also been promoting "smart communities." An example of this is our work with our State 

Librarian to promote libraries as hubs for digital literacy and wireless "hot spots" - both inside and 

outside the library - for its users. Another example is CETF's summary and analysis of government led 

wireless projects, to help communities who are thinking of setting up community WiFi initiatives. Work 

has also been done looking at forward looking local government poliCies relating to broadband and 

promulgating a comprehensive sample policy as a resource for local and regional government leaders. 

Public Awareness 

Fourth, we use Public Awareness and Education campaigns to enhance our Broadband Awareness. Our 

major effort here is our "Get Connected" Campaign. CETF launched this "Get Connected" campaign to 

increase adoption among low income and Latino households by 10 percentage points. A website in 

several languages - English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese - help non users learn the basics 

about computers and broadband. Public service announcements in several languages were developed 

and are aired in ethnic media and at Community Connect Fairs in target neighborhoods. The message is 

simple: Broadband makes your life easier. 

Strategic Partnerships 

Fifth, all of this broadband awareness work has been done with $60 million of seed money for CETF. 

This could only be done with strategic partnerships with government, foundations, universities, 

broadband providers, Internet companies, and employers to joint venture on major projects like the 

California Telehealth Network, Smart Housing, School2Home, and "Get Connected." 

Finally, how do we know these broadband adoption programs work? We partner with Public Policy 

Institute of California and ZeroDivide to measure and track our broadband adoption statistics to 

measure progress. So far, looking at our 2008 to 2009 date, we are very encouraged by the trends we 

see. 

Thank you for this opportunity to provide information to the Committee. I look forward to answering 

any questions you may have. 

4 
37 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Ms. Chong. Ms. Sass. 

STATEMENT OF RIVKAH SASS 

Ms. SASS. Good morning, Chairman Boucher, Ranking Member 

Stearns and—— 

Mr. BOUCHER. Please pull that microphone just a little bit closer. 

There we go. 

Ms. SASS. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of 

the American Library Association, the oldest and largest library association in the world with more than 65,000 members. Public libraries serve every age group and every skill level in our source of 

life-long learning. In 70 percent of our communities nationwide, we 

are the only provider of no-fee Internet access. In rural areas, that 

number is closer to 80 percent. 

In California last year alone, there were 38 million Internet sessions in public libraries on 18,000 computers. That is one session 

for every resident in the state. School, public, and academic libraries across the country really serve as first responders in providing 

Internet access. Even with a 10-megabit connection, sometimes the 

Sacramento Public Library demands surpass our capacity. Without 

sufficient broadband connectivity, it is difficult for us to serve our 

patrons. Without a healthy broadband ecosystem and sufficient 

connectivity, libraries and other anchor institutions would not be 

able to continue our work to improve broadband adoption. 

I want to acknowledge the critical role that the Erate program 

has played for libraries. I thank the members of the subcommittee 

for your support of the Erate program, which is essential to school 

and public libraries. Without the discounts that we receive, I honestly do not know how Sacramento Public Library would cope. We 

really depend on this program. 

Information is useless unless one knows how to access and apply 

it. Access to high-speed broadband alone does not guarantee that 

our Nation would be equipped to thrive in a global information society. The FCC plan acknowledges this principle, noting the importance of digital literacy as a necessary life skill, much like the ability to read and write. 

We know that access to broadband is a basic requirement for social and economic inclusion in our democratic society. Improving 

broadband adoption requires the development of basic digital literacy skills, something central to the mission of public libraries. 

We are viewed as trust intermediaries in our communities, whether 

rural, suburban, or urban, and we are ideally situated to help 

shape and lead national efforts to foster and increase digital literacy. 

Public librarians play a key role in shrinking the digital divide 

by providing digital literacy training. We offer no-fee Internet 

classes ranging from email basics to job searching skills, and genealogy. In these tough economic times, the most powerful example 

of what motivates individuals to come to the library seeking digital 

literacy skills has been the search for employment. 

Library staff at our Rancho Cordova branch library recently 

helped a job seeker by helping him update his resume, upload it 

to an employer’s Web site. When he called to verify that they had 

received his application, they offered him a job on the spot. And he 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
38 

started the next day doing electrical construction. He told us he 

could not have done it without our help, and I know our colleagues 

in libraries across the country could tell you the same story about 

helping teach these digital literacy skills and about providing nofee access to the Internet. 

The truth is librarians are perfectly positioned in our communities to shape and implement local, state, and national efforts to 

improve broadband adoption. 

I would like to thank Congresswoman Matsui who introduced the 

Broadband Affordability Act of 2009. Addressing the issue of affordability as a barrier to adoption, the bill would complement the 

work that libraries do in teaching digital literacy skills. 

I would also like to note that the American Library Association 

supports the recommendations in the National Broadband Plan 

that all Americans develop basic digital literacy skills, and we support the development of the digital literacy core. We respectfully 

suggest the subcommittee introduce and consider legislation that 

would authorize and support the creation of such a core as recommended in the FCC plan. This is something that librarians can 

really sink our teeth into because we want to be leaders in the effort of working collaboratively with others to develop the program. 

As a Nation, we must be prepared to compete in work in which 

digital literacy is essential and not a luxury. The digital literacy 

core would infuse in our communities the needed resources to increase those skills and improve broadband adoption rates in the 

home. Libraries are already well aware of the benefits of having access to the Internet and online resources. A digitally literate citizenry will result in a workforce that is prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st Century global marketplace. 

My colleagues and I thank you for your leadership and support. 

Libraries would not be able to do what we do without you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Sass follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
39 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 46 76579A.018

ALAAmericanLibraryAssociation 

Testimony of 

Rivkah Sass 

Director, Sacramento Public Library System 

Before the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

The National Broadband Plan and Promoting Broadband Adoption 

May 13,2010 

On Behalf of the 

American Library Association 
40 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 47 76579A.019

Chainnan Boucher, Ranking Member Stearns and Members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you for your invitation to testify on behalf ofthe American Library Association (ALA) on 

recommendations in the National Broadband Plan for increasing broadband adoption, My name is 

Rivkah Sass, and I am the Director of the Sacramento Public Library System. I am also a member 

of the American Library Association, the oldest and largest library association in the world with 

more than 65,000 members. Our members are primarily school, public and academic librarians and 

some special librarians, as well as trustees and mends oflibraries. 

My testimony draws upon my experiences as a professional librarian for more than thirty 

years and on my current position as director of the fourth largest library system in California 

serving the public in the city of Sacramento and Sacramento County, as well as the cities of Citrus 

Heights, Elk Grove, Galt, Isleton and Rancho Cordova. The Sacramento Public Library System 

operates 27 libraries, has over 200 staff members, houses a collection of more than two million 

volumes and has an annual budget of$35 million. More than 600,000 residents have a library card, 

and over seven million items are circulated each year. The most recent addition to our system is 

the new North Natomas Library facility, which opened in January 2010. Featuring more than 120 

public-access computer stations, a robust collection of books, periodicals, DVDs and CDs 

containing more than 100,000 items focused on community and student users, our new branch has 

something to offer everyone in the community. 

Libraries, as community anchor institutions, arc at the forefront of efforts in our country to 

improve broadband adoption in the home. The critical role of libraries in helping drive adoption in 

our communities is demonstrated by the fact that the first sustainable broadband adoption grant 

awarded through the American Recovery and Reinvestruent Act CARRA) of 2009 was to tbe New 

Mexico State Library. Specifically, the New Mexico State Library was awarded $1.5 million by 

2 
41 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 48 76579A.020

the National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA) Broadband Technology 

Opportunity Program (BTOP) to increase broadband adoption and promote computer literacy and 

Internet use among vulnerable populations, Hispanic and Native American users, small businesses 

and entrepreneurs through training and outreach statewide. The award will support the "Fast 

Forward New Mexico" initiative, which includes training programs at public and tribal libraries to 

increase the skills of New Mexico citizens!. 

In addition, some libraries and their communities have also received stimulus funding 

through BTOP's Public Computing Center (PCC) program. For example, the Arizona State 

Library, Archives and Public Records was awarded a $1.3 million grant to enhance public 

computing facilities in more than 80 public libraries throughout the state. More than 1,000 

computers will be added in a state where more than 90 percent of public libraries reported they do 

not have enough public computers to meet demand some or all of the time. 2 Another example is 

the city of Boston, which will use stimulus funding to expand computer and Internet capacity at the 

Boston Public Library and its 26 branches. 3 Both of these grant awardees will devote a significant 

portion of their grant funds to training individuals to use computers and the Internet. Once these 

individuals become more comfortable using computers to access the Internet at the library, they are 

more likely to subscribe to broadband service at home. 

Such examples of one-time infusions of funding will undoubtedly have a significant, 

positive impact on improving broadband adoption in grant-winning communities. It is important to 

note that libraries have also sought other collaborative ways to help improve broadband adoption, 

beyond seeking stimulus funds. For example, state libraries are teaming with other state agencies 

1 The "Fast Forward New Mexico" grant application is available at 

http://www.nmstatelibrarv.org/docs!btop/FFNM application.pdf 

2 A Perfect Storm Brewing: Budget Cuts Threaten Public library Services at Time of Increased Demand. (2010). 

Available: http://www.ala.org!ala/research/initiatives!plftas/issuesbriefs/issuesbrief-perfectstorm.pdf 

'Ibid. 

3 
42 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 49 76579A.021

to cost-effectively train librarians to assist newly unemployed residents. For example, in North 

Carolina, which has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, the state library 

collaborated with the Unemployment Security Commission and the Department of Commerce to 

train librarians, create an online job search toolkit and expand job-related library collections.4 

However, more must be done to help shrink the digital divide by improving broadband 

adoption rates in all of our communities. The Federal Communication Commission's National 

Broadband Plan outlines specific recommendations as next steps. There are many 

recommendations I believe libraries are well positioned to be at the forefront in shaping and 

implementing, in particular the recommendation to create a Digital Literacy Corps. I will return to 

this idea later, but first would like to outline the central role oflibraries in improving broadband 

adoption rates in our communities. 

Libraries and tbe Broadband Ecosystem 

While our library system in Sacramento is fortunate to have a supportive city government 

and library board of directors, as well as vibrant community support, we too are dealing with the 

challenges facing most libraries across the country today. Without a healthy broadband ecosystem, 

libraries and other anchor institutions along with our colleagues in community-based organizations, 

K-12 schools and colleges, universities and community colleges will not be able to continue our 

work in supporting and improving broadband adoption. 

A community's broadband ecosystem is comprised of many components - including but not 

limited to libraries and other anchor institutions such as educational institutions, community-based 

organizations, state and local agencies, and the members of the community all dependent upon 

sufficient broadband connectivity. To increase broadband adoption rates in our communities, these 

'Ibid. 
43 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 50 76579A.022

members must coordinate their efforts to offer services and technology in the most efficient manner 

possible. 

As any librarian will attest, information is useless unless one knows how to access and 

apply it. Likewise, access to high-speed broadband, by itself, would not guarantee our nation will 

be equipped to thrive in a global information society. The Federal Communications Commission 

acknowledged this principle in its National Broadband Plan's chapter on adoption and utilization, 

noting the importance of digital literacy as "a necessary life skill, much like the ability to read and 

write." We know that the access to broadband is a basic requirement for social and economic 

inclusion in our democratic society. The "costs" for those who do not utilize the Internet have 

increased exponentially by the shift of critical services and life tasks (e.g., filing for unemployment 

benefits, completing job applications, filing state and federal taxes, receiving information from 

your child's teacher, etc.) requiring Internet access. 

Improving broadband adoption requires the development of basic digital literacy skillswhich is central to the mission of libraries. And libraries - school, academic and public - are 

already present in communities across America. We are viewed as the trusted intermediaries in our 

communities - whether rural, urban or suburban and are ideally situated to help shape and lead 

comprehensive national efforts to foster and increase digital literacy, thus improving adoption. 

This mission to develop information literacy, including digital literacy skills, begins in K-12 

schools, where school librarians, as instructional leaders in their schools, teach computer 

technology skills, emphasizing collaboration skills as tools to communicate more effectively, 

conduct research more efficiently, and increase productivitY.s School librarians know the school's 

5 The term "digital literacy" describes a subset of the larger concept of "information literacy." Information literacy 

encompasses a full range of capabilities required to successfully navigate analog as well as Internet reSQurces. 

5 
44 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 51 76579A.023

curriculum and effective techniques for crossing disciplines, collaborating with teachers and 

integrating infonnation and technology literacy into core curriculum. 

In our more than 3,800 colleges and universities, including community colleges, academic 

librarians work with students every day to help them develop technical and cognitive skills needed 

to be infonnation and digitally literate. They also work closely with faculty from all disciplines to 

develop pedagogies to enhance teaching, learning and research on their campuses. In addition, 

librarians in academe teach students the importance of creating and caring for their own digital 

identities and respecting the intellectual property of others. 

Beyond the classroom, public libraries serve learners of every age and skill level and are a 

source for lifelong learning. There are currently 16,543 public library outlets in communities across 

the nation, and libraries are found in virtually every community in the United States6 Nationwide, 

71 percent of all public libraries report they are the only provider of no-fee Internet access in their 

communities. In rural areas, 79 percent oflibraries are the only no-fee Internet access providcr.? 

State library usage statistics for California last year indicates that more than 38 million Internet 

sessions were conducted on a mere 18,600 public access computers statewide; that literally equates 

to an Internet session for every resident of the state of California. 

Public librarians, in particular, playa key role in shrinking the digital divide by providing 

fonnal and infonnal digital literacy training one-on-one or by offering fonnal classes from 

helping patrons open their first e-mail accounts to teaching Internet search skills and computer 

applications. The ability of public libraries to reach a large proportion of the nation's population is 

commensurate with the goals of the National Broadband Plan to increase individual broadband 

6 Henderson, E., et al. (2009). Public Libraries Survey: Fiscal Year 2007 (IMLS-2009-PLS-02). 

Institute of Museum and library Services. Washington, DC. Available: 

http:Uharvester.census.gov!imls/pubs!Publications!fy2007 pis report. pdf 

7 Davis, et al. (2009). Libraries Connect Communities 3: Public Library Funding & Technology Access Study. Chicago: 

American Library Association. Available: http://ala.org/ala/research/initiatives/plftas/2008 Z009/index.cfm 

6 
45 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 52 76579A.024

adoption rates. In fact, over half of all public libraries provide informal, point-of-need instruction 

and training. Also, about half of urban libraries and libraries in high poverty communities report 

they consider offering formal training in computer and Internet skills a critical library service.s 

However, rural public libraries, in comparison to suburban and urban libraries, face greater 

challenges offering formal training classes. Only 24 percent of rural libraries offer such classes, 

compared with 42 percent of suburban and 52 percent of urban libraries.9 In Sacramento, for 

example, our libraries offer regularly scheduled no-fee computer classes open to all members of the 

community including communication basics (sending e-mails, writing letters, making shopping 

lists, attaching photos or other documents, etc.), introduction to the Internet, job search workshops, 

genealogy research online, and how to conduct online research, to name a few. 

In addition, some libraries are going beyond formal classes and providing patrons with 

specialized, highly targeted consulting services. In Omaha, Neb., the Omaha Public Library's 

Swanson branch has created two programs targeted at teaching digital literacy skills - the "rent-alibrarian" and "rent-a-geek" programs. Both programs are no-fee and available to the public; 

patrons can sign up for a one-hour session with a librarian or library staff member. The rent-alibrarian program is also marketed to the local business community. The rent-a-geek program has 

capitalized on the otherwise untapped computer and technology skills of library aides, typically 

high school students and young adults, to assist patrons with elderly patrons being the biggest 

population to take advantage of these services. The library branch manager at the Swanson Library 

explained that these services are very popular. She credits this free, targeted, non-judgmental help 

as one creative solution to devote the time needed (and required) to provide very basic digital 

• Davis, et al. (2009). Libraries Connect Communities 3: Public Library Funding & Technology Access Study. Chicago: 

American Library Association. Available: http:Uala.org!ala/research/initiatives!plftas/2oo8 2009/index.cfm 

• Ibid. 

7 
46 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 53 76579A.025

literacy instruction when helping an individual take the first steps to becoming a broadband 

adopter. 

Broadband Connectivity 

In my community of Sacramento we have made a real commitment to technology. 

However, notwithstanding that strong commitment, our current levels of broadband connectivity 

are being tested by very real-world demands, which are only increasing. For example, our Valley 

Hi-North Laguna Library opened on August 29, 2009. It serves a diverse community with a 

portion of the population living below the poverty line. This library receives heavy usage by 

children and teens and is located across the street from a community college with many students. 

Because the library offers wireless Internet access, it is not uncommon to have 30 or more people in 

the building with their own laptops, using the wireless connection. We consider many ofthcse 

patrons to be "power users" - using the Internet to access media, music, and other high-bandwidth 

demanding applications. A mere four months after opening the library branch with a 10 megabit 

connection, at peak times, utilization reached well beyond capacity. Without sufficient broadband 

connectivity, it is difficult for our staff to provide basic services to our patrons including teaching 

basic digital literacy. 

Unfortunately, our experience in Sacramento is not atypical. Demand already has or will 

very quickly outpace many libraries' current broadband capacity. While both urban and rural 

libraries report increases in connection speeds, they also continue to report that the connection 

spceds are insufficient to meet patron needs all or some of the time. lo Without adequate 

connectivity, a library's ability to help improve broadband adoption rates is significantly hampcred. 

Data from a recent 2008-2009 ALA study found that more than 80 percent of libraries enforce time 

limits on computer use and 45 percent of libraries enforce time limits ranging from 31 to 60 

10 Ibid. 

8 
47 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 54 76579A.026

minutes. I I Such limited windows of time greatly hinder both a librarian's ability to provide digital 

literacy instruction and an individual's ability to complete a job application or participate in 

distance learning courses, for example. 

E-rate 

I would be remiss ifI did not acknowledge and recognize the critical role that the E-rate 

program has played in supporting telecommunications and other services for libraries and schools, 

in many instances helping sustain broadband connectivity. I would like to thank the members of 

this subcommittee for the creation of and continuing support for the E-rate program. Over the last 

several years, the E-rate program has provided discounts to public libraries and public and private 

schools for access to advanced telecommunications and information services. Without such 

discounts to support ongoing costs associated with telecommunications connectivity, our libraries 

and schools would be hard-pressed to provide the services they do today. 

Libraries and schools depend upon an efficient E-rate program to help them meet their everincreasing broadband needs, especially in this economic climate. The ALA is on record with the 

FCC in support of improvements to the E-rate program such as raising the circa-l 998 funding cap 

of$2.25 billion to meet current needs and identifYing ways to simplifY the application so that all 

libraries - big and small - can successfully obtain this critical financial support.I2 

Relevance 

Access to broadband alone does not constitute adoption. Several factors come into play -

including an individual's comfort with technology, ease of use, and experiencing success at finding, 

using and creating relevant content. Studies show that it is not having a computer at home, or the 

]] Ibid. 

12 Submission of the ALA to the FCC Concerning NBP Public Notice 1115, November 20, 2009. Available: 

http://www.wo.ala.org/distrietdispatch/wp-content!uploads/2009/11/E-Rate-comments.pdf 

9 
48 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 55 76579A.027

ability to have one, that motivates an individual to go online. 13 There needs to be a culture of 

adoption through which an individual can internalize the personal and societal benefit to going 

online. The ALA maintains that for those individuals who have not yet adopted broadband at home 

(non-adopters), for those whose Internet connection is inadequate for some applications, or for 

those who at one time subscribed to broadband at home but no longer do so (un-adopters), the 

public library is the logical space where patrons can realize the benefits of going online. In such a 

setting, patrons can receive technological support at the point-of-need and are more likely to find 

the information they seek, be it educational content, a job application, federal assistance forms, or 

an e-mail from a family member serving in the military overseas. In addition, even those with 

sufficient broadband at home (adopters) tum to the library for additional technology and advanced 

digital literacy training and access to information resources, such as databases. 

In these tough eeonomic times, perhaps the most powerful examples of what motivates 

individuals to come to the library seeking digital literacy skills has been to search for employment. 

I would like to like to share with yon two real-life stories of how librarians and library staff are 

helping patron in this way. While these examples are from libraries in the Sacramento area, I can 

assure you that my colleagues across the country can recount similar stories. 

Library staff at the Rancho Cordova Library were delighted to help a job seeker on April 28 of 

this year. Staff helped the patron update his resume to reflect a new home address, assisted him 

with using the Internet to go online and locate the correetjob application site and assisted him 

with uploading his resume to the website. Upon calling the prospective employer to share he 

had successfully submitted his resume online, he was hired on the spot over the phone and 

directed to report to work doing electrical construction in the city of Folsom the next day. The 

13 Pew Internet & American Life Project, Home Broadband Adoption 2009, at 3-4 (2009). Available: 

http://www.pewinternet.org/-/media!lFiles/Reports/2009/Home-Broadband-Adoption-2009.pdf and Strover, 

Sharon, Chapman, Gary, Waters, Jody. "Beyond Community Networking and CTCs: Access, Development, and Public 

Policy." Telecommunications Policy 28, no. 7/8 (2004): 465-85. 

10 
49 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 56 76579A.028

patron explained that he was very grateful for the library staffs help and said he could not have 

completed the steps necessary to obtain the job without it. 

Another story from the branch supervisor of the South Natomas Library - a young female 

patron came in to the library to thank the library staff profusely. The patron explained that 

because the library provided access to computers, she used them to create a resume, apply for a 

job and was happy to announce she had just been hired. She expressed sincere gratitude to the 

staff for their help and for the library having computers for her to use. 

Our library staff shares a sense of great pride when recounting such stories because they are 

tangible examples of how their work on the front lines every day with patrons has had a direct, 

positive impact on individuals' lives, not to mention the economic health of our community. 

These employment-related examples demonstrate the importance of people recognizing 

how using the Internet is relevant to them. My years of professional library experience can attest to 

the fact that individuals are more likely to be motivated to learn, in this case digital literacy skills, if 

they have what we librarians call "point-of-need." In addition, new adopters also motivate nonadopters by helping demonstrate to their friends and farnily how going online is relevant to them. 

One such example, one of my favorites, is that of a 94-year-old patron who brought her 87-year-old 

sister in to demonstrate how to access a popular photo website to show her pictures of her grandnephew. Our desire to stay connected with friends and loved ones, and using broadband and the 

Internet to do so, is a great motivator for non-adopters. 

Cost 

The benefits of broadband adoption are undeniable. However, the cost of digital exclusion 

for non-adopters is increasing and even exacerbated as more and more essential services are 

available only online. Libraries are experiencing first-hand the impact of federal and state 

programs switching to online applications for services, job applications, and more students taking 

11 
50 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 57 76579A.029

online courses. Regarding government services provided online, 81 percent of libraries report they 

offer assistance with government fOnTIS and more than half provide specific help in accessing Egovernment services. About one quarter of libraries report they staff one specialist in Egovernment resources. 14 

The stakes for not being online in our society only continue to rise and are highlighted in 

data relevant to non-adopters:l

) 

54 percent of Americans who sent a letter to the editor, contacted a government agency 

or official, or signed a petition did so online: 16 

The unemployment rate nationwide continues to hover at nearly 10 percent, with April 

2010's rate at 9.9 percent;l? and 

62 percent of those currently employed use the Internet as part of work. IS 

In addition, the National Broadband Plan reports that 35 percent of Americans (roughly 80 million 

adults) do not use broadband at home. Also, 22 percent of non-adopters cite digital literacy as the 

main barrier to broadband adoption. 

A recent Social Science Research Council (SSRC) study was commissioned by the FCC to 

analyze the factors shaping low rates of adoption of home broadband services in low-income and 

other marginalized communities. 19 Study findings identified that of non-adopters, 22 percent were 

actually un-adopters. The study also found that libraries and other community organizations fill the 

gap between low home adoption and high community demand and provide a number of other 

" U.S. Public Libraries and E-Government Services. (2009). Available: 

http://www.ala.org/ala/research/initiatives/plftas/issuesbriefs/lssuesBrief-Egov.pdf 

IS Submission of the ALA to the FCC Concerning NBP Public Notice #16, Decemer 2, 2010. Available: 

blli>.://www.wo.ala.org.'districtdispatch/wp-content/ u ploads/2009/I2/ ALA-N BP-Public -Notice-16-12 2 09.pdf 

16 Pew Internet & American Life Project, Home Broadband Adoption 2009, at 3-4 (2009). Available: 

http://www.pewinternet.org/-/media//Files/Reports/2009/Home-Broadband-Adoption-2009.pdf 

17 Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/ 

18 Pew Internet & American life Project, Home Broadband Adoption 2009, at 3-4 (2009). Available: 

http://www.pewinternet.org/-/mediaI/Files/Reports/2009/Home-Broadband-Adoption-2009.pdf 

" Broadband Adoption in Low-Income Communities. (2010). Available: 

http://webarchive.ssrcorg/pdfs/Broadband Adoption vLl.pdf 

12 
51 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 58 76579A.030

critical services, such as training and support. Further, library staff assistance was critical to 

individuals' gaining the skills that lead to confident, sustainable home broadband adoption. 

The SSRC study concludes that librarians are viewed as the trusted intermediaries in our 

communities. Combined with our expertise in teaching digital literacy skills and providing no-fee 

access to the internet, libraries and librarians are perfectly positioned in our communities - whether 

rural, urban or suburban - to actively help shape and implement local, state and national efforts to 

improve broadband adoption rates. 

Supporting Broadband Adoption 

I am pleased to highlight one example of a legislative solution introduced by my 

congressional representative in California, Congresswoman Matsui. Rep. Matsui introduced a bill 

last fall, the Broadband Affordability Act of 2009 (H.R. 3646), addressing the very issue of 

affordability as a barrier to adoption. Her bill would, "establish a broadband lifeline program that 

enables qualifying low-income customers residing in urban and rural areas to purchase broadband 

service at reduced charges by reimbursing providers for each such customer served." Such a bill 

would complement our work in libraries teaching digital literacy skills by assisting individuals with 

adopting broadband in the home. The bill would also go a long way to assist un-adopters becoming 

adopters again. 

Tbe National Broadband Plan - Digital Literacy and Looking Abead 

The library community is pleased that the National Broadband Plan recognizes the essential 

role oflibraries in promoting digital literacy and broadband adoption. The ALA supports the 

recommendations that all Americans develop basic digital literacy skills including launching a 

National Digital Literacy Program, which creates a Digital Literacy Corps; increasing the capacity 

13 
52 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 59 76579A.031

of digital literacy partners with the Institution of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) acting as a 

lead; and creating an Online Digital Literacy Portal. 

The ALA respectfully suggests that this subcommittee introduce and consider legislation 

that would authorize and support the creation of the Digital Literacy Corps as recommended by the 

FCC's National Broadband Plan. Libraries are committed to achieving the goals of digital literacy 

for all Americans; we can really "sink our teeth into" the creation of a Digital Literacy Corps. We 

could provide invaluable insight and would like to lead the effort collaboratively working with 

others to help shape and implement such a program. However, the plan rightly identifies that 

funding will be needed to increase our capacity to carry out the initiative. 

Our suggestion comes at a time when libraries, schools and social and support services are 

experiencing severe cuts in funding. How are we as a nation going to compete in a world in which 

digital inclusion is essential and being digitally literate is no longer a luxury? The creation of a 

Digital Literacy Corps would infuse into our communities the much needed resources targeted 

specifically at developing and improving basic digital literacy skills, thus improving broadband 

adoption rates. A coordinated initiative at the national level under the NTlA has that potential. 

Libraries are already well aware of the benefits and necessity of being able to access online 

materials. Developing a digitally literate citizenry will produce 21" century learners and result in a 

workforce prepared for the challenges of the 21 51 century market place. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Stearns, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify. Also, on behalf of the American Library Association, my library 

colleagues and the people we serve, thank you for your leadership and support. Libraries would not 

be able to provide the services we do today without it. 

14 
53 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Ms. Sass. Mr. Hodges. 

STATEMENT OF C. HOWIE HODGES, II 

Mr. HODGES. Good morning, Chairman Boucher, Ranking Member Stearns, and members of the committee. Our interim president 

and CEO Mustafa Maran sends his apologies for not being able to 

join us today as he is in Haiti on a business mission. 

I want to first thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf 

of One Economy. We are a global nonprofit that leverages the 

power of information and technology to bring low-income people 

into the economic mainstream. I also want to take this opportunity 

to thank the FCC for its bold steps in creating a blueprint for 

broadband adoption within the United States, the first Nation 

Broadband Plan. The FCC should also be applauded for one of the 

most open, transparent and participatory processes in creating this 

plan. 

I also want to applaud Congress and specifically Congressman 

Markey for their vision and leadership in mandating that the FCC 

create the National Broadband Plan. This is a critical first step in 

bridging the digital divide and ensuring inclusion for every person 

in the United States. 

It is a vital step in ensuring the company’s economic recovery, 

stability, and broadband and technology are essential to economic 

development today. It is really about the self-sufficiency of the person. 

For the past 10 years, One Economy has been the leader in 

bringing broadband and more importantly keeping underserved 

communities and unserved communities online. Broadband adoption requires a comprehensive approach that mitigates the barriers 

to broadband adoption and maximizes broadband opportunities. It 

requires an investment and a commitment from the community, regional and federal government and national as well as local corporations. 

At One Economy, we work hand in hand with communities and 

all of the local stakeholders that I mentioned to ensure that we are 

taking action to breaking down these broadband technology and 

adoption barriers in working to bring that into place. 

Again, since our inception, we have led the effort, and we have 

connected over 350,000 families. Through our digital connectors 

program, we have engaged youth all across the country to be digital ambassadors for technology, and we applaud the FCC for expanding that concept in the national plan. 

Let me just talk about barriers to adoption. We heard a little bit 

about it this morning, but I want to take a deeper dive to talk 

about some of these barriers. If we are going to increase broadband 

adoption, we have to really recognize that the barriers, there are 

many. One is access. The Internet is a powerful 24/7 tool, and it 

is important for people to have the Internet in the home. At One 

Economy, we work with affordable housing developers to bring 

broadband into the homes of some of the country’s poorest communities. 

Another barrier is affordability. According to the most recent 

Census Bureau, 76 percent of households earning more than 

$50,000 a year are connected. Only 35 of those homes with annual 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
54 

incomes of less than $50,000 have adopted broadband in their 

homes. Through our work, we have given free Internet for two 

years. Low-income residents are willing to invest in broadband at 

a reduced rate. 

The other barrier is digital literacy. Many people do not know 

how to access or to find that information they need once they get 

connected, which segues into another broadband hurdle, which is 

relevant and easy to navigate online tools. The Pew Research Center, an Internet in American Life Project states that 50 percent of 

those without in-home broadband believe that Internet is relevant 

to their daily lives. 

We at One Economy have demonstrated the value proposition for 

those currently unconnected, and the platform that the proposition 

includes language preference, literacy comprehension, and connection speed, all of which are the principle barriers to adoption. 

Therefore to get people online, we not only have to provide affordable access, but we also have to provide digital literacy training. 

And again that is what our youth engagement program, Digital 

Connectors, is all about. 

Finally we must address another major barrier to broadband 

adoption, and that is ensuring that there is 21st Century technology to underserved communities. With the recent VTOP award, 

One Economy in partnership with the historic Broadband Opportunity Coalition, which is a historic alliance of the leading civil 

rights and policy organizations. They are the American Justice 

Center, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, the 

League of Latin American Citizens, the Minority Media and Telecommunications Counsel, the NAACP, and the National Council of 

La Raza, and the Urban League. 

I see my time is about to expire, and so in conclusion, the role 

that the federal government should establish national goals and interim benchmarks setting the north star for a U.S. progress board. 

We recommend a creation of a five-year plan with clear benchmarks and annual performance assessments. Thank you for giving 

me the time to make my remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hodges follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
55 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 62 76579A.032

National Broadband Plan Hearing in House Communications, Technology and Internet Subcommittee 

of Energy and Commerce 

Testimony of Howie Hodges, Senior Vice President Government Affairs, One Economy 

May 13, 2010 

My name is Howie Hodges and I am the Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at One Economy 

Corporation (www.one-economy.com). Our Interim President and CEO, Moustafa Mourad sends his 

apologies for not being able to join us today as he is in Haiti on business for One Economy. 

I want to first thank you for this opportunity to speak on behalf of One Economy, a global nonprofit that 

leverages the power of technology and information to bring low-income people into the economic 

mainstream. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the FCC for its bold steps in creating a 

blueprint for broadband adoption with the United States' first National Broadband Plan. The FCC should 

also be applauded for one of the most open, transparent and participatory processes in creating this 

plan. 

I also want to applaud Congress and Congressman Markey for their vision and leadership in mandating 

that the FCC create the National Broadband Plan. This is a critical first step in bridging the digital divide 

and ensuring digital inclusion for every person in the United States. It is also a vital step in ensuring this 

country's economic recovery and stability as broadband and technology are essential to economic 

development today. 

ONE ECONOMY'S HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE 

For the past ten years, One Economy has been a leader in bringing, and more importantly, keeping 

underserved communities online. Broadband adoption requires a comprehensive approach that 

mitigates the barriers to broadband adoption and maximizes broadband opportunities. In the 21st 

century, broadband must be thought of as a 24/7 interface comprised of the home, school, workplace 

and community through the added feature of mobility. 

Working hand in hand with community and political leaders, major telecommunications and cable 

companies, Internet Service Providers, and affordable housing developers, One Economy with these key 

stakeholders creates sustainable information ecosystems that are the foundation of broadband 

adoption. From bringing high-speed Internet access to affordable housing and infusing communities 

with digital literacy skills, to creating engaging, localized online content, our goal is to facilitate each step 

for low-income individuals to enter into the 21st century economy. 

BARRIERS TO BROADBAND ADOPTION 

According to the 2010 National Telecommunications and Information Administration {NTIA} report, 40% 

of Americans do not use high-speed Internet, and those without high-speed Internet are 

disproportionately people of color. According to studies, one of the major barriers is access. One 

Economy works with affordable housing communities to bring high-speed access into the home. To 

1 
56 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 63 76579A.033

date, we have brought broadband access to more than 375,000 low-income people in 42 states 

nationally (urban, rural and tribal communities) and globally. 

Another barrier to sustained broadband use is affordability. According to the most recent Census Bureau 

data, while 76% of households earning more than $50,000 per year are connected, only 35% of homes 

with annual income less than $50,000 have adopted broadband in their homes. low income families are 

also less likely to have the money for broadband subscriptions and adequate hardware to connect to the 

Internet. Working with Internet service providers and cable companies, One Economy provides free 

multi-year service contracts with the option to renew at a reduced rate. Once residents understand the 

benefits of the Internet, the majority are willing to make an investment in high-speed Internet. In a lowincome housing complex in Atlanta, 65% of the residents who received two years of Internet service 

opted to pay for services at a reduced rate in the third year. 

Digital literacy is yet another barrier to broadband adoption. Many people do not know how to access or 

find the information that they need once they are connected. Digital Connectors is One Economy's 

youth technology, leadership and mentoring program that provides high-risk youth, ages 14 to 21 with 

certified technology training, builds leadership skills and prepares students to enter the 21st century 

work force. Participants in the Digital Connectors program then give back to their community by 

training family members and residents on how to use technology effectively. To date, 3,000 at-risk 

young people from diverse backgrounds have been trained as One Economy Digital Connectors and 

these youth have contributed more than 77,000 hours of service to their communities, spreading digital 

literacy as technology ambassadors. Many corporations, including Comcast and AT&T, have sponsored 

Digital Connectors programs and their staff volunteer at Digital Connectors sites providing mentoring 

and workforce development training for enrolled youth. 

The Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project states that 50% of those without in-home 

broadband believe the Internet is not relevant to their lives. One Economy demonstrates the value 

proposition for those currently unconnected and the platform of that proposition includes language 

preference, literacy comprehension, and connection speed, all of which are principal barriers to 

adoption. Therefore to get people online, we not only have to provide affordable access and digital 

literacy training, but we also need to connect people to the information that matters most. 

One Economy uses a participatory process in creating easy to use online programming, resources and 

tools that meet the special needs of local communities. We call this online programming public purpose 

media. Our public purpose media network includes the Public Internet Channel (pic. tv), which has 

engaging and award winning online programming and series designed to help people take action to 

improve their lives. 

One of the features of pic.tv is the MAKE IT EASY TOOLBOX, which connects audiences with dynamic, 

relevant, local resources related to the featured programming. Additionally, we create multi-lingual 

community web portals referred to as Beehives. The Beehives offer local resources on filing taxes, 

finding doctors, jobs, and other vital information throughout the United States and globally. To date, 

One Economy has reached more than 18 million visitors with our multi-lingual web properties. In 2009 

2 
57 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 64 76579A.034

alone, low-income households received $12.5 million in refunds after filing taxes via One Economy's free 

online resource at the beehive (www.thebeehive.org). Two million Americans applied for 

unemployment benefits and 1 million people worldwide received help in writing their resume in Arabic. 

BRINGING BROADBAND TO MOST UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES 

Finally we must address another major barrier to broadband adoption, ensuring that we are bringing 

21st century technology to underserved communities. Those without high-speed Internet in-home are 

disproportionately people of color. Fifty-four percent of African Americans and 60% of Latinos do not 

have in-home broadband. One Economy formed a partnership with the Broadband Opportunity 

Coalition (BBOC), a historic alliance of the leading civil rights and policy organizations in the United 

States. These organizations have joined together to overcome barriers to adoption of technology in 

communities of color. The BBOC members include: 

• Asian American Justice Center (AAJC) 

• Joint Center for Political & Economic Studies 

• League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) 

• Minority Media & Telecommunications Council 

• The National Association of the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) 

• National Council of La Raza (NCLR) 

• The National Urban League 

The BBOC brings these organizations together for the first time to advance broadband opportunities in 

unserved and underserved communities. This collation will leverage One Economy's history in 

implementing broadband adoption to low-income communities to bring the wide and diverse 

constituents of the BBOC online. Recently, One Economy and the BBOC were selected by the U.S. 

Department of Commerce, National and Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) for 

a $28.5 million grant through the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP). This grant was 

provided through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. Additionally, One Economy facilitated 

an almost one-to-one match through public-private partnerships ($23 million). The public-private 

partnerships include AT&T, Comcast, National Association of Broadcasters, Cisco, Google and CTIA-the 

Wireless Association with members including AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon. 

Additionally, One Economy is in a partnership with an unprecedented group of Internet service 

providers, computer technology companies and non profits to help bring broadband to low-income 

homes throughout the United States. The Digital Broadband Adoption Coalition would work with the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to improve broadband access, services and 

technology in approximately 250,000 low-income households nationwide. One Economy filed an 

application on behalf of the coalition through BTOP on March 15. 

3 
58 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 65 76579A.035

DEFINING ADOPTION 

One Economy is thankful that the FCC and the United States government recognize the importance in 

investing in our poorest and most underserved communities: the people who are not aware of the 

importance of using 21" century technology in entering the economic mainstream. 

It is because of our firsthand, on-the-ground experience in breaking down the barriers to broadband 

adoption, One Economy urges the FCC to fully commit to a comprehensive approach to broadband 

adoption and measuring broadband adoption and a proactive approach to ensuring its success. Just as 

there is a comprehensive approach to breaking down the barriers to broadband adoption, there must be 

a comprehensive approach to defining and measuring adoption. Subscribership is important, however it 

is equally as important to understand how people are using broadband and the impact that broadband 

is having on the quality of their lives. 

True adoption occurs when people, regardless of income level are using 21st century technology to 

improve their lives. We can measure its success by looking at Ubiquity, Usage and Utility. 

Ubiquity focuses on how many individuals are served by broadband and what is the average cost per 

person. Usage refers to what people are connecting to online, what type of information they are able to 

access, and utility refers to the action that users take once they connect to these online resources. Are 

users building resumes and getting jobs online? Are seniors finding health care information? Are schools 

providing 24/7 access to education? 

Importantly, the home must be at the center of this ecosystem. For a small business owner or a 21st 

Century employee with school-age children, working from home is no longer merely an option; it is 

often a necessity, and broadband transforms that necessity into a reality. For a student, parental 

interaction and involvement is vital to a healthy education. Broadband in schools, community centers, 

and libraries is also key to this ecosystem and to creating a culture of positive broadband use by 

enabling the next generation of in-class technology and applications. 

Too often, those who can least afford are asked to make the greatest sacrifices. America must make an 

affirmative and proactive decision to put the poor first in line for broadband when it thinks of creating a 

21" Century ecosystem. Emphasizing alternative means of broadband access instead of home usage will 

have the unintended consequence of depriving low-income Americans of the benefits of broadband 

where they need it the most - in the home. With the home at the center, important services such as 

telemedicine, job training, distance learning, and basic education will benefit those most in need. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The first role of the government should be to establish national goals and interim benchmarks, setting 

the North Star for U.S. progress in broadband. We recommend the creation of a five-year plan with 

clear benchmarks and annual performance measurements. In addition to addressing speed, 

affordability, availability, and adoption, these benchmarks should also include demand principles, as 

outlined above, and national priorities such as: 

4 
59 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 66 76579A.036

• Healthcare: Tele-Health, Health record Management, and Aging in Place 

• Education: E-learning, Education in the Classroom, After-School, and in the Home 

• Economic Development and Employment: Job Training and Re-Training, Career Coaching, and 

Job Growth 

• Rural Economic Development 

• Home-based Access to Broadband 

• Digital literacy 

The government should also create a National Emergency Network, a meet you-where-you-are digital 

framework and delivery system for natural and man-made emergencies. This Network must have an 

intentional focus on the poor, as they are most often deprived of information and resources that are 

critical in coping with an emergency, most evident in the events leading up to and in the aftermath of 

Hurricane Katrina. 

The National Plan should fully consider the needs and opinions of unserved and underserved people and 

regularly gather their feedback through community assessment surveys and field hearings. This requires 

intentional government action so that individuals and communities left behind in the first wave of 

broadband deployment receive the attention and services that will catalyze adoption in their 

communities. 

Policies and initiatives should enable individuals and communities to maximize the benefits of the 

Internet so that everyone can receive a social dividend. Broadband availability, affordability and training 

are requisites for adoption. In turn, the capacity to use broadband and its tools will enhance civic 

engagement since so much public dialogue has shifted to online forums. Internet media platforms 

engage users and provide them with the opportunity to learn about their government, get involved at a 

local level, and make their community a better place for them and their families to live. 

Providing communities with technology does not guarantee success on its own; people must feel a 

sense of ownership over that technology to maximize the benefits that they receive from it. With this 

philosophy in mind, One Economy has produced public-purpose media projects around the world with 

intensive stakeholder engagement process aimed at building consensus in the target communities, 

developing relationships with local NGO's and other partners, and identifying the key developmental 

issues that technology solutions should address. 

To encourage community participation, we recommend that the FCC continue to take a grassroots, 

bottom-up assessment that facilities a participatory process, including community meetings, focusgroups, and household surveys to ensure the maximum participation among a wide cross-section of the 

United States. 

Through community assessment surveys and regular field hearings, the government can assess several 

questions: What is important to the local community? How will they use technology? What do the 

people of this community care about? How much are they spending? How can this national plan be 

5 
60 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 67 76579A.037

implemented to meet the needs of the local community? At what price point do low-income individuals 

find sufficient utility in broadband to adopt it in their homes? 

As stated earlier, broadband efforts should focus on both removing barriers to adoption and maximizing 

unique opportunities. Broadband adoption programs should include the following: 

• Affordable broadband connections - Broadband Internet access must be made available at 

affordable price points for low-income populations. The price in-and-of-itself is a limiting statistic 

because it does not accurately reflect a person's ability to pay, while conversely, affordability 

takes into account a person's socioeconomic standing. 

• Affordable hardware choices - Computer, mobile phones, and other broadband-related 

hardware options must also be made available at affordable price points. In some instances, 

rebates or reductions will bring the price of that hardware into the affordable range. In other 

instances, the knowledge of affordable options will be sufficient, especially as the price for 

hardware, with the advent of netbooks and other light-weight options, has decreased. When 

given the proper information and an affordable option, low-income populations, as is the case 

with other sectors of the population, will act in their own best interests and save in order to make 

the hardware purchase. 

• Awareness of broadband options and benefits - Awareness outreach should be directly 

connected to increasing utilization of broadband by targeted populations. Non-adopters need to 

understand the benefits of broadband and the resources that are available. This awareness 

outreach should include online education and skill development programs provided by local 

governments, communities and the private sector. 

• Promotion of digital literacy - Enhancing or developing the necessary and vital digital literacy 

skills is key for the target population to use broadband technology effectively for beneficial, 

enriching purposes. Digital literacy programs include: development of technology skills, training 

in how to obtain and use technology, excelling in academic arenas, and preparation for 21st 

century work place. 

• Relevant content - Content should be relevant to specific user populations. For instance, lowincome populations may require targeted, local information on education, jobs and 

entrepreneurship, while Native Americans may require specific content relevant to Indian 

nations. Included among the many valuable and enjoyable aspects of broadband should be the 

provision of informative content that serves a public purpose. 

The role of a National Broadband Plan should be to incentivize private corporations and non-profit 

organizations to deliver the 3As (Access, Affordability, Adoption) and develop a regulatory framework 

that protects capital investment, encourages competition, and rewards innovation. 

6 
61 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 68 76579A.038

CONCLUSION 

The mission of One Economy is to bring people and information together through the most powerful 

tool available, the Internet. The impact of this mission has been profound. While One Economy has laid 

a foundation for broadband adoption, we know firsthand that it will take the commitment and 

investment of a wide range of community, government and corporate leaders. When One Economy 

started in a basement 10 years ago, many people - even corporate and political leaders - viewed 

technology and the Internet as a lUxury. Today, it has become evident, with a general consensus 

amongst the private and public sectors that the United States cannot afford to lag behind the rest of the 

world in broadband adoption. An investment in broadband adoption, the implementation of a US 

National Broadband Plan is critical to the economic strength and growth of this country. 

Thank you for giving me this time. 

7 
62 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you, Mr. Hodges. Ms. Taylor. 

STATEMENT OF LAURA TAYLOR 

Ms. TAYLOR. Chairman Boucher—— 

Mr. BOUCHER. And, yes, please pull that as close as you can. 

Thank you. 

Ms. TAYLOR. Chairman Boucher, Ranking Members Stearns, and 

members of the committee, it is an honor to be here. Thank you 

for the opportunity to discuss broadband adoption within the context of the National Broadband Plan. 

Connected Nation is a nonprofit organization that has worked for 

nearly 10 years on the ground with states, local communities, consumers, and technology providers to build pragmatic public/private 

partnerships for increased broadband adoption and digital literacy 

for all Americans, both urban and rural. 

Our experience and the data that goes along with it shows that 

the Nation’s demand gap is significantly larger than the supply 

gap, with supply outstripping demand by between 30 and 35 percentage points. One striking example of the depth of this adoption 

gap falls in Congressman Gordon’s district, Clay County, Tennessee, where 94 percent of residents have broadband available, 

yet only 38 subscribe. Connected Nation is currently delivering to 

NTIA broadband data and maps for 13 states and territories. And 

while identifying and fulfilling those supply-side gaps is essential, 

our experience in hundreds of American communities across the 

country has taught us that broadband adoption stimulation is the 

key to the ultimate success of any effort to fully address the 

broadband challenge. 

Successful adoption programs in Ohio and in Tennessee and in 

other states demonstrate the need for federal support for public/private partnership programs to increase broadband adoption as recommended by the National Broadband Plan. In our experience, 

proven programs that drive broadband adoption and stimulate private investment are a highly efficient use of taxpayer funds, and 

data show that once someone begins to use broadband, they tend 

to keep it which in turn drives economic stimulus across a community. 

Coshocton County, Ohio, in the heart of Appalachia, and in Congressman Space’s district, is a prime example of effective leadership working together for sustainable broadband adoption and expansion. In 2008, home broadband adoption in Coshocton County 

was 32 percent, significantly below the state average. Connect 

Ohio’s local research revealed that the top barriers to broadband 

adoption in Coshocton County were a lack of interest in broadband 

and a lack of broadband availability. 

To overcome these barriers, county leaders working in partnership with Congressman Space and Connect Ohio developed a model 

for broadband expansion using public safety towers and a local provider to create jobs and to drive new broadband deployment into 

a large portion of this county. 

In coordination with this effort, the local broadband team is developing a countywide awareness and adoption plan centered on libraries and community colleges. Connect Ohio has now implemented this same model across a number of counties, resulting in 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
63 

RFPs for broadband expansion in seven communities in the last 

three months. 

A bit further south, excuse me, in Tennessee, recent data show 

that the public/private efforts of the statewide Connected Tennessee program are paying off. In the past three years, the growth 

of home broadband adoption in Tennessee has outpaced national 

growth, as Congresswoman Blackburn mentioned, and targeted 

populations have seen even greater gains. Minorities in Tennessee 

have now surpassed Caucasians in terms of Internet use with 84 

percent of minority adults in Tennessee reporting that they use the 

Internet. This well exceeds the FCC reported national average of 

78 percent. Connected Tennessee has proven that the key to encouraging adoption is the coordinated development of locally relevant broadband applications that target the specific needs of each 

community. 

This is important because converting nonadopters requires that 

intervention go well beyond broadband cheerleading. We must 

demonstrate that a broadband-connected computer provides value 

that will improve the value of life and provide wealth-creating opportunities. 

Perhaps one of the most powerful case studies comes from Congresswoman Blackburn’s district in Perry County, Tennessee, 

where the unemployment rate is one of the highest in the country. 

Through the Connected Tennessee Computers-For-Kids program 

and a donation from the AT&T Foundation, Intel-based computers 

and printers were placed in a summer youth program to create jobs 

of high school students, students who work to improve web-based 

tourism and economic development for the city of Lyndon. 

After the summer program ended, the computers were transformed into a digital factory creating permanent technology job in 

Perry County. Broadband adoption in Perry County has grown by 

175 percent since 2007. 

We look forward to continuing to work with Congress, the federal 

government, states, and thousands of local champions across the 

country who understand and share our mission for universal digital 

inclusion across America. Thank you for the opportunity to testify 

today, and I look forward to answering any questions that the committee members have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Taylor follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
64 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 72 76579A.039

PREPARED TESTIMONY OF CONNECTED NATION CHIEF POLICY OFFICER 

LAURA TAYLOR 

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE INTERNET 

"THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN: PROMOTING BROADBAND ADOPTION" 

THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2010 
65 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 73 76579A.040

TABLE OF CONTENTS: 

I. INTRODUCTION 

II. NEED FOR ADOPTION STIMULATION EFFORTS 

III. STIMULATING BROADBAND ADOPTION: WHAT HAS WORKED? 

TENNESSEE: A CASE STUDY FOR DRAMA TICALL Y IMPROVING 

BROADBAND ADOPTION 

COMPUTER DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS AMONG Low-INCOME 

COMMUNITIES Is AN ESSENTIAL TOOL TO OVERCOME KEY BARRIERS TO 

ADOPTION 

IV. THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN MAKES SEVERAL GOOD 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

V. IN THE BROADBAND DATA IMPROVEMENT ACT CONGRESS OUTLINES THE 

MOST EFFECTIVE METHOD TO OVERCOME BROADBAND ADOPTION BARRIERS 

VI. ApPENDIX: CONSUMER INSIGHTS INTO AMERICA'S BROADBAND CHALLENGE 

AND OPPORTUNITY 

2 
66 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 74 76579A.041

Chainnan Boucher, Ranking Member Stearns, and Members of the Committee - thank you for 

the invitation to discuss broadband adoption within the context ofthe National Broadband Plan 

("NBP" and "Plan") released recently by the FCC. 

Connected Nation is a nonprofit organization that works with states, local communities, and 

technology providers to increase broadband adoption and digital literacy for all Americans 

both urban and rural. For nearly I 0 years, Connected Nation has worked directly with states, 

local leaders, consnmers, and broadband providers to build public-private partnerships to identify 

gaps in broadband service; understand broadband and computer adoption barriers in 

communities; develop grassroots technology planning teams in every county across a state for 

improved broadband adoption, and provide computers along with technology literacy programs 

for low-income and disenfranchised people. We work on behalf of American consumers, and we 

continue to find, time and again, in communities across our nation, that unserved and 

underserved people can and will overcome broadband challenges when the public and private 

sectors work together toward meaningful solutions. 

II. NEED FOR ADOPTION SnMIJLA nON EFFORTS 

When we examine the state of U.S. broadband through tbe prism of supply (infrastructure) and 

demand (adoption), it is clear tbat the nation's "demand gap" is significantly larger tban tbe 

"supply gap." As such, to the degree that policy makers desire to generate the impacts oftassociated with broadband use, it is imperative that the balance of energy and attention be 

dedicated to closing the broadband adoption divide. 

Connected Nation is currently delivering to NTIA data and broadband inventory maps for 13 

states or territories (Alaska, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Ohio, Puerto 

Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas). While identifying and filling those supply side 

gaps is essential, in concurrence with the National Broadband Plan, Connected Nation's 

experience in hundreds of American communities has taught us that broadband adoption 

stimulation is the key to the ultimate success of any effort to fully address the broadband 

challenge. 

Connected Nation's 2009 research in Ohio and Tennessee estimates household broadband 

availability J between 92% and 95%. However, only 60% of households in these states adopt the 

service at the home, indicating a significant gap in adoption that must be addressed (see Figure 

I). The rates of adoption among certain demographic groups are even lower. These data are 

consistent with the FCC's recent report on broadband adoption barriers stating that 2

, among 

other key points: only 65% of adults are home broadband adopters; 50% of rural American 

adults adopt broadband, compared to 68% among non-rural American adults; and 6% of 

Americans use dial-up Internet connections as their main fonn of home access. 

I State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program Notice of Funding Availability defines broadband as "Data 

transmission technology that provides two~way data transmission to and from the Internet with advcI1ised speeds of at least 768 

kilobits per second (kbps) downstream and at least 200 kbps upstream to end users ... " 

lliW~LfSY.M~'.:illi~AQf-,gQ.\'!.lm2tif.Q.,"-~4QJ}9jt:.RJ2LQ?JlQandMmm.ingNQFA 09JllD~pJlf 

2 Broadband Adoption and Use in America: OBr Working Paper Series No. J, February 2010, available at 

httpj/hrallnfoss.fcc.gov!cdo~s pnhliuattacbmarch:DOC-296442A l.pdf 

3 
67 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 75 76579A.042

Figure 1: Low Adoption Demographics 

78% 

All residentsl low· 

I income* 

I 

Computer ownership III Broadband adoption 

Age 65 Adults with No college African Low~income Rural 

or older disabilities education American households 

with 

chi!dren~ 

Connected Nation data is consistent with the FCC's recent report on broadband (Broadband 

Adoption and Use in America: OBI Working Paper Series No.1, February 2010, available at 

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov!cdocs publ iciattachmatch!DOC-296442A l.pd!) 

projecting that 78% of adults are Internet users, whether that means broadband, dial-up, access 

from home or access from someplace other than home. The FCC reports 65% of adults are home 

broadband adopters. The FCC data demonstrates a rural gap in broadband adoption, reporting 

that 50% of rural American adults adopt broadband, compared to 68% among non-rural 

American adults. Further, there is an adoption gap among African-Americans, 59% of whom 

currently adopt broadband, and among Hispanics, whose adoption rate is only 49%. Only 42% of 

people with disabilities and 35% of Seniors currently adopt broadband, according to the FCC. 

Similarly, the FCC also recently released a report detailing the state of broadband availability in 

the US, estimating broadband penetration at 95% (at speeds of 4 Mbps download and 1 Mbps 

upstream)3 In our experience, through public-private partnerships, the market can be harnessed 

with local consumer research and granular broadband maps to drive targeted broadband 

deployment to where it does not currently exist. Examining the state of U.S. broadband today, 

we quickly recognize that supply of broadband outstrips demand by between 30 and 35 

percentage points. 

J The Broadband Availability Gap: OBl Technical Paper No.1, April 2010, available at 

http://dmvnload. broadban<;l !.!oviplan':the-broadband-availability-gap-obl-tcdm ical-papcr-no-J .pdf 

4 
68 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 76 76579A.043

These state level trends are also measured at the localleve!. In areas where the recession has hit 

the hardest, broadband adoption is much lower, even in areas where broadband is already 

universally available. One of the more striking examples falls in Congressman Gordon's district 

- Clay County, Tennessee, where 94% of residents have broadband available, yet only 38% 

subscribe (and that already accounts for a significant adoption increase of 15 percentage points 

since 2007). In communities across our country, Americans are not taking advantage of the 

benefits of broadband, even when it is available. This docs not diminish the need for deploying 

broadband to areas that are unserved and underserved via stimulus funding and other programs 

as suggested in the National Broadband Plan. Broadband is a tool, and like any other it must be 

used to produce results this is the measure by which we will gauge the true success of failure of 

our efforts. 

Connected Nation's community-driven research demonstrates alarming broadband adoption gaps 

among at-risk populations. Figure 1 above illustrates computer ownership and broadband 

adoption rates across various vulnerable demographics in Tennessee and Ohio. Consistent with 

NBP findings on broadband adoption trends, these results show that while statewide broadband 

adoption rates in Tennessee and Ohio were estimated at 60% in 2009, only 26% of adults with 

disabilities, 27% of households earning less than $25,000 per year, 28% of citizens over the age 

of 65, 35% of low-income households with children, 41 % of adults with no college education, 

47% of rural households, and 48% of African-American households subscribe to home 

broadband service. 

The largest barrier to broadband adoption among adults who do not subscribe to broadband 

service in the home is relevancy, or a lack of awareness about the technology's benefits and 

associated value. 38% of those with no home broadband connection say "I don't need broadband 

or the Internet." 32% of respondents claim lack of computer ownership as the barrier to 

broadband adoption. Likewise, the top barrier to computer ownership is also a perceived lack of 

need. 59% of those who do not own a computer say, "\ don't need a computer," and 25% of 

those who do not own a computer cite the up-front cost as a barrier. Similarly, 21% of those 

without a home broadband connection say broadband is too expensive (Figure 2). 

5 
69 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 77 76579A.044

Figure 2: Barriers to Technology Adoption 

Barriers to Computer Ownership: 

I don't need or don't 

know if ! need a 

computer 

Too Expensive 

I can use a computer at a 

different location 

Other reason 

Barliers to Broadhand Adoption: 

I don't need broadband 

or the internet 

I don't own a c.omputer 

Too ExpensIve 

Broadband is not available in 

my area 

I access broadband or Internet 

service elsewhere 

Concerns about fraud or 

identitytheft 

Last year, Connected Nation provided to this Committee a policy brief titled "The Call to 

Connect Minority Americans." In it we highlighted some of the more severe broadband 

adoption gaps that exist in the U.s. today, including data showing that in 2007-2008 only 20% of 

low-income minority households adopt broadband, compared to 50% adoption rates among all 

Americans4 Similarly, Connected Nation's research shows a gap in adoption rates across rural 

(47%) and non-rural households (64%)5 

These disparities demonstrate the need for federal support for public-private partnership driven 

efforts to increase broadband adoption. Innovation and demand will drive updates to both 

hardware and software that will require the support of faster and more robust networks, which 

means that broadband infrastructure investment is likely to continue increasing without 

significant intervention. In Connected Nation's experience, however, programs that can drive 

broadband adoption represent a highly efficient use of taxpayer funds because data show that 

once someone begins using broadband, they tend to keep it, thus driving economic impact for 

their community. An April 2009 survey by the Pew Foundation's Internet Project reported that 

people are twice as likely to sacrifice cell-phone service or cable television service than Internet 

service, with 22% of adults reporting that they had cancelled or cut back cable TV service in the 

previous 12 months, 22% of adults reporting that they have cancelled or cut back cell-phone 

4 The Call to Connect Minority Americans: A Connected Nation Policy Brief, 2009, available at 

hup:i/\vww.connectcdnation.ofgj documents/en minority policybrief final 031609.pdf 

5 A Call to Connect Rural America: An American Fann Bureau Federation and Connected Nation Policy Brief, filed at the 

National Broadband Plan Publie Notice # 18, available at 

http.//ww\v.conn(:ctednation.org· doculTI<:"l1ts/ AFBFCNrcspouseNBP 1 REconomicOppFIN AL 12 2oo9.pdf 

6 
70 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 78 76579A.045

service in the previous 12 months, compared to only 9% of Internet users reporting cancelling or 

cutting back on broadband. 6 

Connected Nation filed extensive comments, as part of the FCC's proceeding to craft a National 

Broadband Plan, on the model it has implemented with and on behalf of several states, which has 

been honed over the past five years to be scalable and replicable. 7 For a review of this model 

and the experience in various states, please see "Connected Nation, Inc. Comments On A 

National Broadband Plan of Our Future, G.N. Docket 09-51 at 

http://tjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs!retrieve.cgi?native or pdt~pdf&id document=6520220269 

Further, Connected Nation has included as an appendix to this testimony a filing that summarizes 

Connected Nation's filings on several issue areas in the National Broadband Plan, which can also 

be found at http://tjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/documentiview?id=7020384086. Further, a Connected 

Nation filing specifically regarding broadband adoption can be found here: 

http://connectednation.org! documents/ConnectedNationresponseNBPNo 16BroadbandAdoption 

FINALII 2009.pdf. 

III. STIMULATING BROADBAND ADOPTION: WHAT HAS WORKED? 

Connected Nation and its programs have been most successful at stimulating broadband adoption 

by inspiring and empowering communities to lead local initiatives that both reach out to 

disadvantaged populations and non-adopters AND also spur the creation of local applications, 

which create a higher level of relevancy that in turn spurs adoption. 

We must note for the Committee, however, that these adoption programs do not and are not 

designed to function alone and should be part of a comprehensive and larger statewide or 

regional broadband initiative for maximum effectiveness and sustainability. Successful adoption 

stimulation programs implemented by Connected Nation combine: 

1) Broadband mapping at a household and business level to identify infrastructure gaps as 

well as adoption barriers and other demand-side dynamics; 

2) County level research to identify specific barriers to broadband adoption in each 

community; 

3) County level technology planning teams, which will use the broadband maps and local 

research to develop tactical and community specific business plans for tecbnology 

expansion; 

Comments ~ 

hnp::',\;onncctcdnation.org1 dOl'UI1lt:l1h'COnnl!ctcd;.iationPo\icy!hie1Th(:CalltoConncl.:tAmcrican;-.withDisahi!itic~.rdf 

Libraries- http:,"/fiallfoss.fcc.gov/(:cts'document/vIew'?id'"702024 3836 

E-GoV-J.lgp://lja[ln~J~.; 0:0v:~cr" doqnTIclltivicw?id=7020347106 

Adoption-.bup:; iCOllll~Cl ednatJoll .Drg.: . documenrsiCor]nectedNa tionresponsl!1\B PNo 1_6BroadbandAdpl1!Q!1.fI;-..l AL I! ~009. pel f 

IIealthcare- btm:/iconncctcdnation.orQi docliment'}/Conncctcd'Nationrcspon<;eNBPNo. 17Hcalthcarc 12 2009.pdf 

Rural America- http:'/clmnectednation.orgf document3/AFBF-C!\iresponse1\BP:-Jo.I 8EconornicOnpFI:-.l"AL 12 2009.ndf 

USF & IC- !m~J.Hll,:£~dnation·.Q!:&._sh}gQI!]£BL<>K~Q.J.l!l~.QNruj~)Jlr,Q.QltllQ!lt,sKu, 19U.S£~Qm.12jn9.Q.J2~f 

Economy- http;.'iconnt"ctcdnation.orlT,: dOfy"n1Cnts/CNRcply('omments1\BPNo.18EconOpportunitYl2 2009.pdf 

Education- hnp:!/conncctl.':dnation.om· documcnts/CN-NCBCP-B\\'RrespOilsetoNBPNo.15-Education 12 2009.pdf 

7 
71 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 79 76579A.046

4) Computer connectivity programs for low-income and underserved populations; and 

5) Thematic collaboration and cooperation between the public and private sectors across 

all program elements. 

These five elements are consistent with the Broadband Data Improvement Act's Congressional 

mandate, which outlines a strategy to effectively address the national broadband challenge8 All 

five programmatic elements of the Broadband Data Improvement Act are critical for success in 

ultimately increasing broadband adoption and economic prosperity. 

Public-private partnerships, such as those that Connected Nation works to foster, have proven 

themselves as the most effective vehicle for improving broadband availability and adoption. A 

key to encouraging adoption is to demonstrate how technology can impact the quality oflife 

locally across all relevant sectors of the local economy. Central to this objective is the 

coordinated development of locally-relevant broadband applications that target the specific needs 

of each community through civic engagement (e-government), education, healthcare, and 

economic development. This is important because converting non-adopters requires intervention 

that goes well beyond "broadband cheerleading" or awareness raising campaigns; we must 

demonstrate that a broadband-connected computer provides value that will improve quality of 

life and provide wealth-creating opportunities. Such improvements tend to be local applications: 

job opportunities, access to school infonnation and education services; access to health services; 

connection to family; and so on. 

The strategy developed by Connected Nation to tackle this problem through grassroots 

involvement includes the creation of Local Broadband Task Forces. These volunteer teams 

become the point of engagement between broadband service providers, technology solutions 

providers, and local communities. Connected Nation empowers these local champions with 

essential information about the current state of technology in their community and provides 

pragmatic tactical plans to implement strategies at the local level for local online content and 

usage expansion. Importantly, each community determines how it can best benefit from 

broadband and technology expansion, creating a sense oflocal pride in ownership. 

Community leaders come from key sectors, starting with local government and including other 

sectors such as healthcare, education, and the local private sectors, all of whom volunteer to 

develop and implement technology promotion plans within their communities. In this manner, 

the Connected Nation model fosters a sustainable, grassroots coalition of community leaders 

representing local government, education, health care, telecommunications, organized labor 

representatives, businesses, libraries, agriculture, tourism, and community-based organizations. 

Community-level plans include detailed analysis of the best means of deploying new and 

available technology across each of the aforementioned sectors. The overarching purpose of 

these Local Broadband Task Forces is to crcate and aggregate demand for broadband, identify 

locally relevant applications or solutions, fostcr cooperation across both private and public 

sectors to ensure that the community's needs are fully addressed, and create local awareness of 

the opportunities of broadband. 

8 For more information regarding the Broadband Data Improve Act mandate see the final Section of this testimony as well as the 

testimony of Brian Mefford, CEO of Connected Nation at: 

8 
72 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 80 76579A.047

These teams are the heart of the success of Connected Nation's comprehensive strategy to 

promote broadband demand and stimulate private investment. Through these teams, communities 

are engaged in their digital futures and take charge of practical, viable, and sustainable solutions 

that address the particular barriers to broadband availability and adoption in those communities. 

Below, results from Tennessee's local-level research and technology planning are explored in 

detail, but this type of work is also happening in every county across the state of Ohio. 

Coshocton County, Ohio, in the heart of Appalachia, is a prime example of effective leadership 

working together for sustainable broadband expansion and adoption. In 2008, broadband 

adoption in Coshocton County, Ohio, was measured at only 32%, falling more than 40% below 

the state average. Localleve1 research revealed Coshocton County's top barriers to broadband 

adoption as a lack of interest in broadband and lack of broadband availability. To overcome these 

barriers, the leaders of Coshocton County, Ohio, working in partnership with Congressman Zack 

Space and Connect Ohio, developed a model for broadband expansion using public safety towers 

and a local provider to create jobs and new broadband deployment into a large portion of the 

county. Meanwhile, the Coshocton County local technology team is developing a county-wide 

awareness and adoption plan centered on libraries and community colleges. 

This Coshocton County effort is a public-private partnership involving many state and local 

agencies, local providers, and the entire community. This model has been adopted by Connect 

Ohio and shared across counties in Appalachian Ohio to produce seven community RFPs for 

broadband expansion in the past three months. These communities are proving that broadband 

expansion can and does occur when the public and private sectors work together, on the ground, 

to identify the true broadband challenges that are specific to each community, map the 

broadband gaps, and demonstrate an effective business case for expansion while simultaneously 

driving technology growth from the ground up, by addressing local needs and leveraging local 

resources. 

TENNESSEE: A CASE STUDY FOR DRAMATICALLY IMPROVING BROADBAND ADOPTION 

Connected Tennessee, a subsidiary of Connected Nation, has been working since 2007 to 

improve broadband adoption and availability in every Tennessee county. Connected Tennessee 

has partnered with local leaders in each of the 95 counties in the state to develop and implement 

county-level broadband strategic plans that address the key barriers measured in each community 

and develop pragmatic solutions that work. The results of such efforts speak for themselves. 

Home broadband adoption in Tennessee in 2007 was 43%. In January 2010, that rate increased 

to 58% accounting for 334,935 new home broadband subscribers in the state9 ,JO The Pew 

Internet and American Life Project estimates national household adoption rates at 47% in 2007 

and 60% in 2010, demonstrating that efforts in Tennessee are effectively closing the dividen 

Attesting to the success of the broadband adoption stimulation efforts undertaken across 

Tennessee, these data demonstrate faster growth in adoption of broadband service in Tennessee 

9 July 2007 and January 20 J 0 Connected Tennessee® Residential Technology Assessments. 

10 Household estimate based on Census Bureau 2000 estimate of Tennessee household of 2,232,905. 

II Pew Internet and American Life Project (surveys conducted in March 2007 and January 2010). 

9 
73 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 81 76579A.048

than in the rest of the country. In the three-year period between 2007 and 2010, the growth rate 

in broadband adoption in Tennessee was 35% compared to a national growth rate of28%. 

Thanks to this faster growth, the lag in adoption rates in the state of Tennessee relative to the 

national average went from 4 percentage points in 2007 (47%-43%) to a two-point gap (60%-

58%). 

While Broadband adoption and Internet usage grew statewide in Tennessee between 2007 and 

20 10, there was notably significant growth among demographic groups who have historically 

been on the wrong side of the "digital divide," For example, at the inception of Connected 

Tennessee, 72% of minority adults reported that they used the Internet either from borne or some 

other location, compared to 78% of Caucasian respondents, By January 2010, though, 84% of 

minority adults report tbat they use tbe Internet, compared to 83% of Caucasians, Similarly, 

between 2007 and 2010, Tennessee cut the gap in Internet usage between rural and non-rural 

adults in half, from 6% to 3%. This growth is in part due to Connected Tennessee's efforts that 

promoted demand stimulation among every community across the state, with a focus on 

vulnerable populations and low adopting groups such as minorities and rural residents. 

Significantly, "take rates" in Tennessee have also increased markedly during this period. "Take 

rates" are defined as the percentage of households that have broadband available and also 

subscribe to broadband service. Measured take rates in Tennessee in 2007 were 50% and 

increased to 63% by 2010, In other words, while in 2007 only balf of those households served 

chose to subscribe to broadband service, in 2010 close to two-thirds of households that have 

broadband available subscribe to the service. 

This is an important trend, since in a market economy the demand is often the driver of 

investment. Higher take rates translate into higher demand, which provides a greater incentive 

for providers to continue providing quality service and expanding the network into unserved 

areas, This basic economic principle, which is at the core of Connected Nation's model for 

broadband stimulation, appears to be working, Analyzing county-level data of broadband 

availability and adoption rates, Connected Nation bas measured a positive significant correlation 

between county level take rates in 2007 and subsequent expansion of broadband availability at 

the county level. 12 This suggests that providers have responded to increasing demand by 

expanding their available service, whether into rural or non-rural counties, 

In fact, a significant portion of this growth in broadband availability and adoption is measured in 

rural areas. As measured in other states and consistent with FCC national findings, rural 

adoption rates in Tennessee lag behind urban and suburban rates. In 2007 broadband adoption 

rates in Tennessee among urban, suburban, and rural households was 50%, 42%, and 30%, 

respectively,I3 In 2010 adoption rates across these demographics were 63%, 59%, and 48%, 

respectively.14 This implies that the rate of growth of broadband adoption during this period was 

significantly higher in rural areas than in urban areas, Between 2007 and 2010, household 

broadband adoption grew by 60% in rural areas of Tennessee, compared to 26% among urban 

households and 40% among suburban households, The strategies implemented across the state 

12 Correlation between 2007 take rates (measured as broadband adoption rates/broadband availability rates) and 

subsequent availability growth (increases in broadband availability between 2007 and 20 to) is ]=.32972. 

IJ 2007 Connected Tennessee® Residential Technology Assessment. 

I" 20to Connected Tennessee® Residential Technology Assessment. 
74 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 82 76579A.049

of Tennessee to stimulate broadband adoption are proving particularly effective among rural 

communities. 

Figure 3: Tennessee Residents With Home 

Broadband Service 

Trends in broadband adoption since the inception of Connected Tennessee® 

2007 1112010 

63% 59% 

Urban Suburban 

Q:Wt;,ell0flh('fQllowingtiescnbethety]X'.ollntcrn8tseNlooYO(lhaVD 

"thorne') 

(n",g.513 TN reSIt'lOniSHl 2007 ilnd n"1,213 TNfBsldBnls In2010) 

Rural 

Tennessee efforts to increase adoption rates among minorities in the state are also demonstrating 

results. In 2007 estimates for household broadband adoption among Caucasians, African 

Americans, and other minorities was 46%, 37%, and 37%, respectively. In 2010 home adoption 

rates among these same demographic groups was 61 %,47%, and 53%.15 

These community programs are successful because they build sustainable, grassroots support for 

broadband adoption and deployment, and because they incorporate the knowledge, needs, and 

expertise of each local community and local government representatives. Broadband providers 

will invest in networks in areas where they know that demand for their service is present and 

sustainable- and the Local Broadband Task Forces, built at their core with state and local 

government assistance, provide that demand stimulation and stability. 

Specific examples of the successes of the Local Broadband Task Force process include: 

1. Bledsoe County, TN, where local leadership, led by Connected Tennessee, is working to 

expand technology outreach at the local library and offering computer training programs 

and experienced adoption growth rates of 400% (J 0% in 2007 to 41 % in 20 I 0). 

2. Sequatchie County, TN, whose local leaders and the local Chamber of Commerce have 

actively worked with Connected Tennessee to increase broadband adoption rates by over 

185%, increasing from 13% in 2007 to 37% in 2010. 

15 2007 and 2010 Connected Tennessee® Residential Technology Assessment. 
75 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 83 76579A.050

3. Van Buren County, TN, whose adoption rate was only 16% in 2007. The local media 

aggressively supported Connected Tennessee's broadband stimulation process and 

adoption today stands at 42%, experiencing a growth rate of 163%. 

4. Bedford County, TN, where there is strong community engagement in the Connected 

Tennessee local broadband task force team, adoption rates grew by 115% from 26% in 

2007 to 56% 20 I O. 

5. Warren County, TN, where the local Chamber of Commerce and library conducted IT 

training classes for the public and for business, emphasizing growth opportunities via ecommerce, and which experienced a doubling of home adoption rates between 2007 and 

2010 (from 29% to 63%). 

6. Anderson County, TN, a technology-savvy county that supports progress in education 

and e-government to promote the green benefits afforded by the technology, and where 

recreation and tourism sectors work with Connected Tennessee to increase broadband 

availability at river locations to support growth of water competitive sports. The county 

experienced adoption growth rates of91% between 2007 (33%) and 2010 (63%). 

7. Grainger County, TN, where community champions have been actively working with 

broadband providers to help drive improvements to broadband infrastructure and has 

partnered with Morgan County on a distance learning grant program, and where 

broadband adoption increased by 92% from 26% in 2007 to 50% in 20 I O. 

8. Putnam County, TN, the home of Tennessee Technological University, where the 

Connected Tennessee public-privatc partnership drew significant engagement by local 

broadband providers and where broadband adoption rates grew by 88% from 32% in 

2007 to 60% in 2010. 

9. Marshall County, TN, whose leaders used the Connected Tennessee eCS process to assist 

in their economic development efforts, and where adoption rates increased by 87% from 

31% in 2007 to 58% in 2010. 

10. Rutherford County, TN, home of Middle Tennessee State University, which in 2007 

experienced broadband adoption across 50% of households, and today boasts 73% 

adoption rate, above the national average. 

11. Overton County, TN, where the local broadband task forces have been highly active, 

enjoyed strong community leadership and an engaged local broadband provider, and 

where the adoption rate increased by 81 %, irom 26% to 47% between 2007 and 20 I O. 

12. Weakley County, TN, is home to E.T. Reavis and Son, established in 1890, which thanks 

to the successful business plan based on online sales, has grown its business beyond the 

local customer base of 2,800 to a become a business still located on the town square that 

brings in 90% of its revenue from online sales across the nation. Weakley County had a 

relatively high household broadband adoption rate of 51 % in 2007. In 20 I 0 adoption 

rates are above the national average at 68%. 

Finally, Haywood County, TN, merits special consideration. Adoption rates in Haywood 

increased by 100% between 2007 and 20 I 0, going from 17% to 34%. Connected Tennessee has 

actively worked with local elected officials and leaders to expand broadband resources. In 
76 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 84 76579A.051

Stanton, Connected Tennessee's Computers 4 Kids® program last year donated 20 new Intelbased computers to the Saint John Baptist Church's After-School Program in Haywood County, 

a program that is serving as a hub of connectivity to a community with limited access to 

broadband technology. Currently, the program has 31 children signed up to participate, but hopes 

to eventually be able to open its doors to at least 200 - 300 children. The program also plans to 

ultimately welcome the entire community to usc the computers at designated hours throughout 

the week. 

State Representative Jonny Shaw serves as the pastor of Saint John Church and remarked that the 

impact of the computers on his rural county is especially significant since Saint John is currently 

one of the only locations in Stanton where the citizens can access broadband Internet. 

The church is utilizing technology in various ways to expand its mission and foster economic 

development throughout the rural community of Stanton. They currently have a website in 

production and are also equipped with surveillance cameras that utilize a broadband connection 

to allow Pastor Shaw to view all angles of the church from the comforts of his home. Pastor 

Shaw hopes to continue to build upon this foundation to keep his church and community on the 

forefront of technology. 

This church-based public computing center is one of its kind in this rural community of Stanton 

and today provides essential high-speed access resources as well as cducational and training 

programs to this otherwise unconnected community. 

The Committee can see this vibrant example via a testimonial by Pastor and Representative 

Shaw and other members of his rural community of Stanton, TN, who have leveraged state, 

local, and donated private resources to work with Connected Tennessee's Computers 4 Kids® 

program to expand a public computing center catering to children and the elderly in their 

community, available at this link: 

http://www.conncctedtn.org/ multimedia/one communitv at a time!. 

Each of these examples of the success of the Connected Nation Local Broadband Task Force 

process shares common trends of local engagement and communities driving their technology 

solutions. Equally as important, these county-level stories illustrate the importance oflocal 

consumer research in a successful broadband initiative. For each of the counties above, 

Connected Nation and Connected Tennessee have gathered county-specific research on the 

barriers to broadband adoption, broadband availability, reasons for broadband adoption, and 

other data necessary to craft the best broadband strategy for each community. 

This granular and regularly updated research allows each local leadership team to understand 

better the technology benchmarks in their community, and it also allows for granular 

measurement of what works, what doesn't, what progress has been made, and how far we still 

need to go. 

13 
77 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 85 76579A.052

COMPUTER DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS AMONG Low INCOME COMMUNITIES Is AN ESSENTIAL 

TOOL TO OVERCOME KEY BARRIERS TO ADOPTION 

According to 2009 research conducted by Connect Ohio, 52% of households who do not have 

access to Internet services at home (broadband or dialup) reported lack of a computer as the 

primary reason for the lack of connectivity. 16 Research conducted in Tennessee and Kentucky 

shows similar results. 17 This data is supported by academic research that shows that education 

and income inequality are important factors that explain low broadband adoption rates. 18 

Faced with this challenge to technology and broadband adoption, Connected Nation works with 

state and local leaders to recognize that a critical part of an effective program to address the 

digital divide challenge had to focus on computer distributions for the poor and disconnected. 

Since its origins, Connected Nation has had the pleasure to help deliver on behalf of state 

government and private donors thousands of computers to low income kids and centers that serve 

them through our No Child Left Offline®/Every Citizen Online®IComputers 4 Kids® digital 

inclusion programs. These programs bring together public and private partners to promote 

digital inclusion by placing computers in the hands of disadvantaged children and their families. 

The private sector promotes the program through generous donations. In fact, the vast majority 

of Connected Nation's funding support from the private sector is funneled to these philanthropic 

programs. State govcrnment brings to the program financial support as well as the rcsources of 

multiple state agencies to help implement the program and identify and locate candidates to 

receive computers. 

Computers 4 Kids® has already delivered more than 3,200 Internet-ready computers to 

disadvantaged individuals and families across the state of Kentucky, and the program is also 

operating in Ohio. A similar program is tackling this challenge in Tennessee where, in 

partnership with the state's Department of Human Services and the Department of Children's 

Services, Connected Tennessee and Computers 4 Kids® is scheduled to deliver 3,000 computers 

to underprivileged children and their families in the next three years and has delivered over 2, I 00 

computers since 2007. Since 2006, Connected Nation has distributed nearly 6,000 computers to 

children and community centers in need. 19 

One of the more powerful success stories from this program comes from Congresswoman 

Blackburn's district in Perry County, TN, where the unemployment rate is one of the highest in 

the country. Through the Connected Tennessee Computers 4 Kids® program and a donation 

from the A TT Foundation, 20 computers and six printers were placed in a summer youth 

program, creating jobs for high school students who gained experience helping improve web16 Connect Ohio 2009 Residential Technology Assessment. Available at: 

hup;.' C011lK'ctoh,oro ! docunJ1."nts:Rcs OH 06192009 FI~ALpdf 

17 Connect Kentucky. 2007 Kentucky Technology Trends: Results of the 2007 ConnectKentucky Residential Survey. Available at 

~www.;.:onnectkentllck \'.01")$: Jocnmt;;nrs/2007KenmckyTcchnolo(fvTrcnds residential 3-28-08 OOI.pdJ 

)3 See G. S. Ford, T. M. Koutsky and L. 1. Spiwak, The Demographic and Economic DriveTs of 

Broadband Adoption in the United States, PHOENIX CENTER POLICY PAPER No. 31 (Nov. 2007). According to the Phoenix 

Center, "broadband adoption is intimately tied to demand-side factors like income inequality and education, and policies directed 

at those factors may be more cost effective than supply~side subsidies and regulation." Id. at 5. 

19 http.':\Vww.youtubc,corn'watch?v=138Pa6IrNUk 

14 
78 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 86 76579A.053

based tourism and economic development for the city of Linden. After this summer program 

ended, the computers were transformed into a digital factory, creating permanent technology jobs 

for young adults in Perry County. 

Computers 4 Kids® and its sister programs have had a dramatic impact on the lives of 

thousands of families, and these distributions have a positive effect on broadband adoption rates 

that goes beyond the recipient households. According to the ConnectKentucky 2005 and 2007 

Residential Technology Assessments, computer ownership among low-income families in 

Computers 4 Kids® counties grew nearly four times faster over the last two years than among 

low-income families in other counties. During the same two-year period, Internet adoption 

among low-income families in Computers 4 Kids® counties grew more than ten times faster 

relative to these families in other areas of the state. Broadband adoption among low-income 

families grew five times faster in counties that received computers through Computers 4 Kids®. 

Indeed, in the last two years, home broadband adoption among low-income families has 

grown by over 200% in these participating counties (Figure 4).20 

Figure 4. 

Technology Adoption Among Low-Income Families with 

Children 

• Kentucky counties participating in Computers 211% 

4 Kids 

o Kentucky counties not participating in 

Computers 4 Kids 

Increase in 

Computer Ownership 

Increase in 

Internet Adoption 

Increase in 

Broadband Adoption 

It is quite clear that programs likc Computers 4 Kids® have a substantial impact upon 

broadband adoption rates. And adoption rates are the key to ensuring that communities continue 

to receive next-generation broadband investment 

20 Counties participating in Computers 4 Kids include the Kentucky counties of Johnson. Clay, Wolfe, McCreary, Owsley, 

Carter, Lawrence, and Morgan. Low-income is defined as annual household income below $25,000. See 2007 Kentucky 

Technology Trends, supra n. 10, at 27. 

15 
79 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 87 76579A.054

IV. THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN MAKES SEVERAL GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS 

In the National Broadband Plan, the FCC makes several recommendations that Connected 

Nation believes should be supported by both the Legislative and Executive Branches. Connected 

Nation applauds the FCC's emphasis on state and local efforts to increase broadband adoption. 

The FCC states in the NBP tbat keeping people online through sustainable efforts that help endusers derive value from the Internet "in his or her own way" are critical and Connected Nation 

wholeheartedly agrees. In our experience, the "value proposition" of broadband is found from 

the creation oflocally-relevant content and applications that end-users can use to improve their 

quality oflife. 

As stated earlier, outreach and awareness campaigns are important elements of Connected 

Nation programs, but these functions are designed to go further than highlight and leverage the 

actions oflocal volunteer leadership teams. They do these things but also go beyond general 

broadband cheerleading to design meaningful local interventions that meet the threshold for end 

user relevance and value that demonstrate not only how the technology will have a positive 

impact on individuals but also how broadband's relevance can help users save and make money. 

The FCC recommends that the NTIA "explore the potential for pUblic-private partnerships to 

improve broadband adoption by working with other federal agencies." Connected Nation 

applauds the FCC's recognition in the Plan of the fact that "tribal, state and local governments 

are often in the best position to identify barriers and circumstances unique to their communities," 

and agrees with the FCC that "local leaders can play an important role by building on existing 

social programs and partnering with community organizations that non-adopters already rely on 

as trusted sources of information. They can tailor adoption efforts to address language barriers, 

lack of credit, low basic literacy levels and other issues faced by non-adopters." These principles 

are the foundation of Connected Nation's demand aggregation philosophy and have a proven 

record of success. 

By recognizing "that there is no 'one-size-fits-all' answer," and that "local action, coupled with 

federal support, ... can connect people with technology to improve their lives," the FCC reaffirms 

recommendations made to this Committee by Connected Nation while Congress was crafting the 

legislation that became the Broadband Data Improvement Act (BDIA). 

The FCC recommends, and Connected Nation agrees, that we: 

• "Focus on the barriers to adoption. Successful efforts address multiple barriers to 

adoption simultaneously. They combine financial support with applications and training 

that make broadband connectivity more relevant for non-adopters. Relevance, in turn, 

boosts the technology's perceived value and affordability." 

• "Focus on broadband in the home. While libraries and other public places are important 

points of free access that help people use online applications, home access is critical to 

maximizing utilization. Broadband home access can also help rural, low-income, 

minority and other communities overcome other persistent socioeconomic or geographic 

disparities." The importance of this point, especially for rural America and rural 

broadband, cannot be overstated. According to our 2009 Ohio residential broadband 

survey, fully 75% of broadband users access the Internet from home'"l 

11 Connect Ohio 2009 Residential Technology Assessment at.hftp:' cOlloectoh.org! documents/Res OH 06192009 FJl\ALpdf 

16 
80 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 88 76579A.055

• "Promote connectivity across an entire community. New users adopt broadband to stay in 

touch with others. In addition, people are more likely to adopt and use broadband if the 

people they care about are online and if they see how broadband can improve their 

quality oflife in key areas such as education, health care and employment." 

• "Promote broadband utilization. Promoting access and adoption are necessary steps, but 

utilization is the goal. People must be able to use broadband to efficiently find 

information or use applications to improve their lives. A connection is just the 

beginning." 

• "Plan for changes in technology. Adoption programs have to evolve with technology. 

Both the trainers and the equipment they use to serve non-adopters must employ up-todate technology and applications." 

• "Measure and adjust. Measurement and evaluation are critical to success because they 

allow programs to make adjustments on an ongoing basis." Connected Nation already 

does this through regular and recurring research and the local level and regularly updated 

broadband maps. 

• "Form partnerships across stakeholder groups. Promoting adoption requires federal 

commitment, state, local and Tribal action, industry partnership and support from 

nonprofits and philanthropic organizations. Sustainable broadband adoption and use will 

require efforts from all partners." This recommendation embodies the state and local 

grassroots team aspect of Connected Nation programs. 

The FCC recommends, and Connected Nation agrees, that "the federal government should 

support the public-private partnership model to implement ... programs at the local level; 

private, non-profit and community-based entities should work together to draw people online, 

particularly those that under adopt." 

Connected Nation would particularly urge the NTIA, and Congress, to support the NBP 

recommendation 9.4 and explore "the potential for public-private partnerships to improve 

broadband adoption by working with other federal agencies. NTlA should consider supporting 

public-private partnerships of hardware manufacturers, software companies, broadband service 

providers and digital literacy training partners to improve broadband adoption and utilization by 

working with federal agencies already serving non-adopting communities. Congress should 

consider providing additional public funds, or NTIA should use existing funds to support these 

partnerships." Connected Nation is proud to be partnering with One Economy, Intel, Microsoft, 

AT&T, BendBroadband, Bresnan Communications, Bright House Networks, Cablevision 

Systems Corp., Charter Communications, Comcast, Cox Communications, Eagle 

Communications, Inc., Dell, Mediacom Communications Corp., Midcontinent Communications, 

the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), Sjoberg's Cable TV, 

Suddenlink Communications, Time Warner Cable, US Cable Group, and USTelecom, to create 

the Digital Adoption Coalition which represents a direct response to this FCC recommendation. 

Finally, Connected Nation strongly supports section 9.6 of the National Broadband Plan, which 

focuses on expanding federal support for regional broadband capacity building, program 

evaluation and sharing of best practices. 

17 
81 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 89 76579A.056

The National Broadband Plan recognizes that not all states are able to consistently fund statelevel broadband programs, such as those in Ohio and Tennessee, and that federal support for 

state and local initiatives is recommended in Recommendation 9.1l. 

The Plan states that the Broadband Data Improvement Act recognized the value of these 

initiatives, and recommends that NTIA "provide additional funding to support ongoing grants 

aligned with Section 106 ofBDIA. The Recovery Act made $350 million available to NTIA to 

fund the state data-gathering and development goals set in BDIA. NTIA has currently assigned 

only a portion of these funds; the remainder should be obligated to state-level organizations in 

2010." Connected Nation strongly agrees, both to fully fund the five-year mapping activities 

already underway, of which NTIA has only funded through Year Two, and to expand these 

grants to their full scope of activities. The NBP states, "Each of the following is consistent with 

the uses outlined by BDIA. These state-level organizations should: 

• Complete strategic planning based on gap analysis of broadband availability, adoption 

and the existing capacity oflocal support organizations. 

• Establish programs to improve computer ownership and Internet access in unserved and 

underserved areas. 

• Provide technical expertise to local institutions, non-profits and governments to develop 

deployment and adoption related initiatives. 

• Work with the private sector to create public-private partnerships to access infrastructure, 

technical expertise, training and program funding. 

• Accelerate broadband application usage in key areas like government, education and 

health care. 

• Gather state and local benchmark data to determine program success over time. 

• Coordinate and enhance volunteer and non-profit programs that provide digital literacy 

and small business broadband training." 

In short, after several hearings and much work and deliberation, Congress outlined the most 

effective method to overcome broadband adoption barriers in the Broadband Data Improvement 

Act. In addition to bipaltisan and widespread support on Capitol Hill, the Broadband Data 

Improvement Act attracted support from a diverse group of organizations, nonprofits, and 

companies. 

Because the NTIA has yet to define how to use the remainder of funds available for BDIA 

implementation, it is important to remember, at this juncture, that mapping is just one piece of 

the larger grant program within the Broadband Data Improvement Act. 

The clear intent of Congress, in authorizing the State Broadband Data and Development Grant 

Program, Sec. 106 ofP.L. 110-385 and then providing up to $350 million for that program in the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was to have this grant program work in concert with 

the other programs authorized and funded as the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program. 

The statutory language of the BDIA included many complementary activities. Broadband 

mapping was to be a starting point of support for a statewide and grassroots demand-stimulation 

program, with local consumer research on technology trends designed to support efforts to drive 

deployment and increase adoption. Finally, digital inclusion programs to provide computers to 

18 
82 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 90 76579A.057

disadvantaged populations were also included as part of the State Broadband Data and 

Development Grant program in order to tackle one of the documented greatest barriers to 

adoption: lack of a computer in the home. 

Furthermore, in the Broadband Data Improvement Act, Congress states: 

"The Federal Government should also recognize and encourage complementary State 

efforts to improve the quality and usefulness of broadband data and should encourage and 

support the partnership of the public and private sectors in the continued growth of 

broadband services and information technology for the residents and businesses of the 

Nation.,,22 

Taken together, the BOlA and the ARRA contained a comprehensive broadband policy laid out 

by the U.S. Congress that will do much to improve broadband deployment and adoption in the 

United States. 

The NTIA has worked swiftly to ensure that it is positioned to deliver a national broadband 

inventory map to Congress by February 2011, and is also providing grants from the Broadband 

Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) for infrastructure, sustainable adoption programs, 

and to expand the capacity of public computing centers. Funding and authorization for BTOP, 

however, is mandated by the ARRA to cease by the end of Fiscal Year 2010. Authorization will 

still exist for the State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program, and the Federal 

government should use the Broadband Data Improvement Act to ensure that state government 

initiatives, including those funded under the BTOP sustainable adoption program, can continue 

or adapt to become comprehensive and statewide efforts. 

This role of enabling initiatives that are driven by the public sector at the state and local 

government level, with information aggregated upward, is consistent with National Broadband 

Plan recommendations for stimulation of broadband adoption and will allow the Federal 

government the greatest efficiency from its allocated resources. The State Broadband Data and 

Development Grant Program can (and was intended to) be utilized well beyond the current Fiscal 

Year to fund statewide efforts that map broadband inventory, aggregate demand and grow 

adoption rates, drive broadband deployment into unserved and underserved areas, and conduct 

extensive consumer research concerning the use and demand for broadband service and related 

information technology scrvices 23 

V. CONCLUSION 

Through the BOlA, the ARRA and the National Broadband Plan, Congress and the FCC have 

laid out a clear path to address the challenge and opportunity that America faces today. Today 

there is a complex intersection of broadband policy issues under revision. It is important to keep 

an eye on the key challenges that we face as a nation. 

Filling in the broadband gaps is essential to ensure that all Americans can participate in the 

twenty-first century economy. These efforts are essential to ensure that rural America remains a 

vibrant part of our economy and society. 

"P.L. I 10-385, Sec. 102 (4) 

2l See P.L. 110-385. Section 106. 

19 
83 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 91 76579A.058

The job, however, is not complete unless we ensure that all Americans who have access to this 

technology are in fact using it in ever more productive ways to improve their lives and 

livelihoods. Congress recognized the need for federal enabling of efforts to stimulate broadband 

adoption across vulnerable populations that remain disconnected. The FCC, through the 

National Broadband Plan, has examined the challenge and proposed a series of recommendations 

to address them. It is imperative that as a nation we focus on programs that have a proven record 

of success working with local communities to identify and address the challenges that each 

community is experiencing. 

As we embark on this extensive and complex review of our national broadband policy, 

addressing such complex issues as Universal Service reform, Intercarrier compensation, or net 

neutrality, it is important that we do not lose sight of the most important challenge - and 

opportunity - that we face. A debate over legal frameworks about network management means 

little to millions of Americans who don't have access to high-speed Internet services or who, 

while having access, are not able to use this technology because they are unaware of its benefits, 

are digitally illiterate, do not own the equipment needed to access it, or cannot afford the service. 

At Connected Nation, we have had the privilege to see firsthand the positive outcomes of 

collaboration and public-private partnerships in this arena, and never cease to be amazed at what 

is possible when a community and individuals have the desire and opportunity to connect and 

access trans formative broadband technology. 

Through our experience, Connected Nation has found that nonprofit organizations such as our 

own have an important role to play working with both public and private sector stakeholders to 

foster and facilitate localized strategies for broadband expansion. Wc look forward to continue 

working with Congress, the Federal government, states, and thousands oflocal champions who 

understand and share our mission for universal digital inclusion across America. 

Thank you again, Chairman Boucher, Ranking Member Steams, and Members of the 

Subcommittee for this opportunity to testify today, and I would be pleased to respond to any 

questions you might have. 

20 
84 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 92 76579A.059

CONNECTED [ .. :t N. 
85 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 93 76579A.060

Table of Contents 
86 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 94 76579A.061

I. Introduction 

During the comment cycle opened by the FCC in connection with the National Broadband Plan 

proceeding ("NBP"), Connected Nation filed i 0 comments offering insights stemming from our archive of 

state-specific survey research on consumer trends In broadband adoption' These comm8nts address 

a myriad of issues regarding what drives and prevents adoption of broadband services across different 

demographic groups, including people with disabilities, minorities, families witll children, library patrons, 

and among rural reSidents and businesses. Connected Nation's comments are based on our years of 

experience working with commumties and states to address the challenges of expanding broadband 

to all citizens, particularly those who are currently disconnected. Connected Nation is a !laHar-profit 

orgamzatlon working to build pubhc-pnvate partnerships to ensure that broadband access is available to 

and increasingly usod by all Amencans 

Our work starts with business and reSidential survey research to help us understand which residents and 

businesses are adopting broadband services, which are not, and how this technology is almady affecting 

people's lives and bUSinesses Our uoal in these filings IS to share key flfKiings of thiS research with poliCY 

makers and others In the' [lODe t!l(1t this Ilch data. Will help Inform our national broadband POliCY In thiS 

briefing we presGnt all overVI8W of some of til0 koy InSights that stern from these fllinqs 

Connectod Nation's data collected across several states offers a general understanding of who is 

adopting broadband technologies and who is not. and what are the key barriers to adoption experienced 

by this latter group. Consistent With other data sources on broadband adoption tronds, Connected 

Nation's 2009 data from the states of Ohio and Tonnessoe systematically reflects that the digital divide 

is particularly problematiC among certalll demographic groups. While state~wide broadband adoption 

rates in Tennessee and OhIO were estlrnatod at 60% m 2009, only 26':'/0 of adults With disabilities, 27% of 

households earning loss th8.n $25,000 per year, 28% of ClllLens over the age of 65, 35% oj lOW-Income 

households With children. 41 % of adults With no college education, 47% of rural households, and 48% of 

African~American households subscnbe to home broadlJand service (F:-Igure 1)? 
87 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 95 76579A.062

78% 

All 

Figure 1: Low Adoption Demographics 

Computer ownership • Broadband adoption 

Low- Age 65 Adultswlth Nocollege Afrjcan low_income 

Income' disabiUUes educatjon American households 

with 

chUdren* 

'L()w-i'lGu;n8 hert:, is oe7ined as ilf.nual l1wseho!d income less 

The largest barrier to broadband adoption arnong adults who do not subscribe to broadband service in 

the rlOme IS a lack of awareness ahout tho tochnology's bone fits, 38% of those with no home broadband 

connection say "I don't need broadband or the Intornet" 32% of respondents claim lack of cornputer 

ownership as tho barner to broadband adoption IJkevvlse. the top barrier to computer ownership is also 

a perceived lack of need. 59% of those who do not own a computer say, "I don't need a computer," and 

25% of those who do not own a computer cite tile up~front cost as a barrier. Similarly, 21 % of thoS8 without 

a horne broadband connection say tl[oadband IS too expensive (Figure 2) ! 

Figure 2: Barriers to Technology 

Barriers to Computer 

Ownership: 

! don't need or don't 

know if I need a 

computer 

Too Expensive 

Icanuse acomputerata 

different!ocahon 

Other reason 

Barriers to Broadband 

Adoption: ! don't need brQadband 

or the Interne! 

I don't own a computer 

Too Expensive 

Broadband is not available in 

my area 

laecess hroadband or Internet 

servlee elsewhere 

Concerns about fraud or 

identitythefl 
88 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 96 76579A.063

Barriers to adoption of broadband service across different demographic groups follow a similar pattern. 

Across several filings contributing to the NBP debate, Connected Nation was able to drill down further into 

patterns of adoption and use by these demographic groups. 

Connected Nation's October 5, 2009, filing regarding broadband as it affects people with disabilities 

indicates that adults with disabilities are falling behind the general populatIon in the adoption of 

broadband technology. Despite the opportunities that a computer and broadband Internet access can 

provide adults with disabilities, only 57% 01 respondents with disabilities in KentUCky. Tennessee, and 

Ohio use a computer compared to 82% for the overall population, and only 26% subscnbe to broadband 

compared to a rate of 52% across the three states under research (Figure 3).'1 

Figure 3: Technology Adoption 

82% 

Use a computer 

IRI Adults without disabilities 

• Adults with disabilities 

79% 

Use the Internet Subscribe to 

broadband at home 

Extrapolating thIS pattern to the national POpul8ilon, this translates into 23 4 million Americans with 

disabilities who lack broadband service at the horne. Lack of computer ownersilip and perceived value 

of the service are the key barners to broadband adoption for thiS demographiC, suggesting that this 

group would be most Impacted by poliCies aimed to ndeJress Ulose d8llland-slde barriers to broadband 

acloptlon.' 

Broadband is an important tool that is starting to revolutionize ileaithcaro dollvery and, as such, 

broadband pmsents a particular opportunity to affoct the lives and livelihood of people WIOl disabilities_ 

In 2009, 72% of broadband subscribers who obtain health care Information online in OhiO and Tennessee 

claim that it has empowered them to be healthier (I'-Igure 4) F-orty-seven percent of broadband 

subSCribers who obtain healtrlcare information online report that obtaining thiS Informa,tlon online has 

prevented trips to the doctor, a hospital, or a medical center (Figure 5).h Such healthcare-related benefits 
89 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 97 76579A.064

stemming from broadband are particularly relevant to people with disabilities> Policies that specifically 

target the millions of Americans with disabilities that remain disconnected should be a key outcome of our 

National Broadband Policy> 

Figure 4: "Obtaining healthcare 

information online has 

empowered me to be healthier" 

Strongly Strongly 

Figure 5: "Obtaining healthcare 

information online has prevented 

trips to my healthcare provider" 

Strongly 

2% 

Broadband is critical infrastructure, necessary to maintain economic stability and encourage economic 

growth. Several studies have shown that with a solid broadband foundation, Amenca's opportlHlltl8s for 

oconomlc growth will Clulckly Improve. Connected Nation's October 22,2009, filing demonstrates that as 

tho United States becomes ovor more reliant on broadband, a key economic opportunity lor our nation 

!s emerging - Americans working frorn home through a broadband connection, commonly known as 

teleworklng 

Residenti?i surveys conductod by Connected Nation in Kentucky. 1ennoss88, and OhiO from 2007~ 2008 

show that while 10''10 of employed adults currently te!ework an addltion8124% of employed adults who 

do not currently t8!owork would bo Interested in dOing so If they were empowered to teiewmk (Figure 6) 

Nationally, this would equato to nearly 35 million potential teleworkors. for a tot8i of 49.5 million or 34% of 

Hle employed adult population' 
90 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 98 76579A.065

Figure 6: Interest in Teleworking Among Employed Adults 

Not interested 

in tel"wo,rkilng-' 

64% 

Currently 

telework 

10% 

Interested in 

I 

24% 

Based on mnpf0Vud civil:"n laUc>r :orce 01 1·:55 ml!lIon, rc'portiid by the US Bureau of l.abor Statistics for Q3, 2008 (';,ww.bis.gov) 

While it is impossible to reduce the entlfe teleworking population down to a "typical" teleworker, Connected 

Nation's survey research enablo us to create a profile of tt18 current telnworking population. Tho vast 

majority of tc~I(}\,vorkers rely th(-:;II" home brondbanci connoctlon to work from hor-no (FlhJure ' once 

agalll shovvfng how Ii,lportant br()(~cJband adoption !s to the growth In leloworking 

Figure 7: Teleworkers by Internet Connection 

Broadband 

88% 

Telework becomes an enablm tor non-working Americans by transforming employment into something trlat 

IS compatible with the realltl8s In theIr lives Fourteen percent of rotirees, 31 % of ilornemakers, and 29% 

of adults with disabilities said they would be wtllinQ to JOin tho workforce II thoy could telework through a 

broadband connection (Figure 8) 1 

Figure 8: Likely to Telework Via Broadband 

31% 

Retirees Homemakers 

29% 

Adults with 

disabilities 
91 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 99 76579A.066

If we assume that new teleworkers earn the national average income, these new teleworkers would create 

an additional $739 billion income earnings annually." That includes over $163 billion for retirees, $103 

billion for homemakers, and $166 billion that would be earned by adults with disabilities each year. 

In order to benefit from this growth in teleworking. though. America needs to place a 11igh priority on 

increasing both the availability and the adoption of home broadband service. Nearly nine out of ten 

teleworkers rely on a broadba!ld connection to work frorr) horne, and the broadband connection speeds 

of teleworkers are significantly higher than the average broadband user.·' Because of the benefits that 

accompany ubiquitous broadband availability and adoption. highlighting the benefits of teleworking has 

rightfully been recognized as a key component of the Commission's National Broadband Plan. The first 

step IS for the Commission to strive for a fast reliable. secure broadband infrastructure by addressing both 

supply and demand barriers to provide broadband for every Amencan community. Connected Nation's 

research has shown that te!eworklng can provide new opportunities for the American workforce. but to 

do so, horne broadband availability and adoption must both increase in order to realize the full potential 

growtr). 

As Figure 1 above reports, low income households and minority households with children present in the 

home are statistically less hkely to use broadbrmd services. despite the fact that the presence of chBdren 

in the horne is shown to be a driver for adoption of computer and broadband services. n Figure 9 below 

reports broadband technology adoption tn Tennessee and OhiO dUrln~J 2009 among households with 

children in the homo from different demograprHc groups. While 72% of all households With children 

subscribe to home broadband service - a figure much higher than the national avorage across all 

households - our data suggest that only 35% of low-Incorne households with children living at homo say 

they subscribe to broadband. Further, 49% at milionty households with children, and only 55% of single~ 

parent households, report that they subscribe to home broadband service. i.\ 
92 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 100 76579A.067

Figure 9: Technology adoption among households with children 

fa Computcr(t\lncrsh~) • BrOlulband adoption 

11=-244 Tennessee ar:d Ohio residents w:th children i:vif'g at hotTIe W!'O do no: GubSeribs :(J homB blc)F:(ibdnd serv'c€'. 

A comparison across reported barriers to broadband adoption In Tennessee and OhiO among low~income 

Gnd minority households with children and the aV8r8ge household With children rev88.ls differences that 

have policy wnpllcations. figure 10 reports that WhilE) the key barriers to broJeJband uSRge among all 

housellolds With children IS a iack of perceived noor:j lack of broadband (-1\Icliiabillty (arnong 28% of 

all household WIH! cluldren respondents), the top barners to adoption of rJroadbond service among low~ 

income and minority households With ch!ldren are a perceived lack of neocL a lack of hOf'ne cornputef 

ownorship, and affOf'dabillty of the servico (r:lgure 10) -fhes() data suqgest that key poliCY strategies 

affecting these demographic qroups are those focused on ameliorating the bafflers to computer and 

broadband adoption, as well as addressing the affordabillty of the service 

Figure 10: Barriers to Broadband Adoption 

Don't need broadband/the Internet 

Broadband is not available 

Too expensive 

No computer 

Access broadband somewhere else 

Concems about fraud or identity theft 

Other Q low·income*househok:!s with children 
93 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 101 76579A.068

Rural households with children also lag behind non~rural counterparts in computer and broadband 

adoption (Figure 11). Rural households with children are less likely to own a computer (81 % of rural 

households, compared to 92% of non-rural households) and only 60% of rural households with children 

subscribe to home broadband servjce, compared to 76% of their non-rural counterparts. 1f, 

Figure 11: Technology adoption among rural households with children 

92% 

Rural households with children NOll-nlral households with children 

Ell Computerol\nership • Brollcirnmd ;uk>ptiOll 

A cornpar ison of barriers to broadband adoption across rural and non··rural households with children who 

do not subscrlbG to broadband Indicates, as one might expect, that not having hroadband available at 

the point of reSidence IS a barrier among rural dwellers (31 % of rural households With chl!dren who do 

not subscribe to broadband Indicate that broadband availabihty is a factor, compared to 27% of non~ 

rural households With childrGn who do not subscribe to br08dband). L.ess predictably. data revDais that 

lack of perceived need and affordability of the service present greater barriers to adoption of broadband 

service for rural households with children than their counterpmt in non-rural areas. ThiS suggest that while 

policies that address network Infrastructure expansion In unserved areas Will have an Irnpact 8!llong this 

demograpllic ~Jroup, poliCies that promote awareness of the value proposition of the serVice, affordabillty, 

and other barriers to adoption will also have an important Impact arnont~ rural hOlJseholds With children 

(Figure 12) In otl1er words, many rural children need to have broadband made availablo where they live. 

However, rural children, Ilke many of their non-rur.?!i counterparts, will also benefit frorn policies that diroctly 

8ddress endemiC barriers to broadband Adoption, such as awareness of the value propOSition. computer 

ownerShip. and affordi::lbliity of the service 

"lbICi, D2Ige 11 

Ibid pdge 12 
94 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 102 76579A.069

Figure 12: Barriers to broadband adoption 

among rural households with children 

Don't need broadband/the Internet 

BrOlldband is not u\'ailable 

Too cXllcn~i\.·c 

No computer 

Access bro:ldbandfthc Internet ~omcplacc else 

Concerns about fraud or identity theft 

Other 

These data have Important repercusSions for the national discussion of how broadband access is affecting 

tilo education of children today In America. in pnrtlcular, the data reveals that today some American 

children do not have the means to enJoy the oniJne 8ejucC!ttonaJ tools Hlal other /\1ll8r1Can ctlildren have 

readily availablo in their rll)fY18s. As online educational applications contillue to take flOid among chllciren 

across our nation Ii IS Imperative that POliCY nl(lkcrs address thiS Imbalanco f"allure to do so wli! Imply 

lesser opportunities for development and econOf'mc potential for those child ron W[lO are experiencing 

digital exclUSion. lnclu(jlng those in low-!ncome, minority, and rural households and others. who are 

often unaware of what it IS they are missing. Figures 13 and 14 below raport different online educational 

applications used by housoholds with children across different demographiCS. The data suggests that 

lOW-Income and rural households With children arG lagging behind other households with children In their 

use of educational online tools 

Figure 13: Use of various online educational 

applications among households with children 

ElCummunkllting"itht,·achl.'r<. 

• Conducting I'c~cl\rch for ~ch()oln'orl, 

('hild l1~n 
95 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 103 76579A.070

Figure 14: Use of various online educational 

applications among rural households with children 

m Communicating with tcachers 

• Conducting rc~can:h for ~(h;)olw{]rk 

• Takin~ontincda"c, 

"*9% 

Ruralholl~chold\ with (hUdn'!1 ~()Il·rural h()u~cbol(h with children 

Figure 15: Percent of each demographic 

group using the Internet at their library 

25% 

Single..parent Low·income* 

households 

25''10 

Minority Adults with 

disabilities 

Connected Nation's filing of October 29, 2009. contributed a discussion about Ule role of libraries as 

important sometimes the only means of high··spee(j access to the Internet among citizens who do not 

have the benefit of a broarlb8nd connection in th8 home or place of work. In 2009, Connected Nation 

conducted surveys to better understand tho role of libraries as community technology hubs 1,' The findings 

Indicate that libraries are Vital In filling Dn access VOid in local communities where the library IS most often 

the only source of free Internet availabliity. Significant percontages of those who normally dord subscribe 

to broadband - speCifically strlQJe parents, minOrities, and low-income reSidents are relYing on the local 

library as their sale or pnmmy Internet resource ?S";{) of Single parents, 25% of minorities. 18% of low 

income reSidents, and 11% of people with cilsabrlltl8s depend on libraries for Internet connections (Figure 

15) 

~Connecta(1 Nation s NHf-' Cu:nrrrents -

"')llll(l. paq& 2 

\\\: 
96 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 104 76579A.071

Figure 16: Percent of library Internet users 

compared to all residents, by demographic 

• Percent of all library Intemet users 

51% 

Households with 

children 

Low~income" 

a Percent of all residents 

Minority 

n,<,400 TN and OH rHSldents, 300 ofwhorn access the ;nterr.8t 

at !r:ei' :ocal library 

:nc~~rnes beicw $25,000 

SI)\.!fce: 2009 flesid€:l'ltiall:9cfmoiogy .Assessf':lents in Termesset~ and Ohlt) 

Upon examining the demographic make~up of library Internet users, three demographic groups stand out 

with significantly higher representation than avemge The share of Internet ilt)rary users WtlO are minority, 

have annual household Incomes below $25,000. or who have children JiVing at home, IS each significantly 

larger than In the population as a whole_ More than one~h(1lf (51 'Yo) of library Internet users have children 

at home, suggesting that a slqnificant portion of those who use the Intcrm~t 8\ their library are children 

Further. 25% of library Internet users are low~mcomo, and ~4(1::' represent Jlliflonty populations. In all three 

groups. those percentages are Significantly higher th8n In the population 8S a who 1o, suggesting that 

Internet access at the iocal library is especially important lor parents and children. lOW-income reSidents, 

and minOrities (figure 16r'l 

Connected Nation's surveys also found that hbrary internet users am statistically more likely than other 

internet users to employ broadband for education, workforce development, CIVIC ongagement, and 

cornmunlcating with healthcare profeSSionals. The surveys found that Itbrary Internet usors arc more 

hkoly than other Internet users to use the internet for imprOVing their education and finding employment. 

FortY-SIx percent of library Internet users search for jobs online, compared to 29% of othAr Internet users. 

Library Internet users take online classes more than tWice as ofton as other Internet usms, and library 

Internet connections are also used frequently for completing homework i-md COf1lnlUnicating with teachers 

(Figure 17) "," 

;"<!bld 

O"jbid, pag8 4 

Figure 17: Internet users who conduct educational 

and workforce development activities online 

Searching for Jobs or 

employment 

Conducting research 

for schoolwork 

Communicating with 

teachers 

Taking claSses 

online m Non~library Internet users 
97 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 105 76579A.072

Libraries are meeting an essential community need by helping community residents find work, as well as 

improve their job skills to increase their productivity and help provide job security, Further, library Internet 

users are more hkely to depend on the Internet as an enabler and resource for civic engagement and 

information. Of particular note, library Internet users are nearly twice as likely as other Internet users to 

communicate online with local government officials (Figure is)?' 

Figure 18: Internet users who engage in civic activities online 

Searching for information about 

community events 

Searching for info about government 

services or policies 

Searching for state government info 

Communicating with local government 

officials 

Communicating with elected officials or 

political candidates 

• Library Internet users 

o Non-library Internet users 

Connecfed Nation's filing on November 6, 2009, provided input and examples of successful state 

and local govermnent initiatives, prograrns, and participation that have positively Impacted available 

knowledge on broadband/technology data, broadband deployment, and the rate of household broadband 

adoption In many states, including those in which Connected Nation has beon 8n active playef, state, 

local, and tribal governmonts have been a key driver in broadband improvement to date t>government 

serVices, Of the use of the Intornet to access government Information and serVices, IS D Vital online tool 

for rnany Arllencans. and one that IS growing in Importance as more government agencies at the local, 

state, and fedorallovel proVide a greater variety of online serViC0)S to clients, buslnosses, and other 

governmental agencies 

Connected Nation research srlOws that a growing share of bOtl-l resluents and bUSinesses rely on 

their home broadband connection to stay in touch with local. state, and federal government agencies 

Hesearch from 2009 Hl Tennessee showed that 44% of all Tonnessee adults use their home bro8dband 

connection to conduct o-government activltles (Figure 19) ,',I This represents a 76% growth rate Itl the 

adoption of e-government from July 2007 \vhen only 25% of adults used tllOlr home broadband services to 

access to e-governmont sorvlces 
98 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 106 76579A.073

Figure 19: Tennessee adults who use broadband for e-government services 

44% 

July 2007 January 2009 

Additionally, a growing number of (ilff,;-mmt dt:l1lograp!-uc groups rely on ttleir horne broadband S81Vico to 

connect with their local. state, and federal qovernrnent offices (Figure 20) 

Figure 20: Percent of all Tennessee residents who use 

home broadband service to access e-government services 

OJ July 2007 • January 2009 

53% 

7% 11% 

Age 65 or Adults with Low-income" No college Rural Minority Households 

older disabilities degree with children 

Consumers who access e-governrncnt services through their rlome broadband connection reported that 

they do so for a number of reasons. most of which fall Into two distinct catogories: uSing the Internot to 

learn about government services and poliCies. and conducting online transactions With government offices 

(Figure 21) ~ 
99 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 107 76579A.074

Figure 21: Type of e-government applications accessed 

by Tennessee adults using a home broadband connection 

.. July 2007 

34% 

Getting information about government 

services and policies 

• January 2009 

Making online transactions with the 

government 

Connected Nation research shows that online access to e-government services has been growing 

steadtly In recent yeRfs, rapidly becornlng a '"k11l8r appJlcnllon" for broadband sBfvices: an application 

prOViding tangible value, and hence a key reason to adopt and continue uSing broadband access, to both 

citizens and the private sector. TillS trend should continue anel be strengthened through the promotion 

and investrnent by government In those services It is Impol"iant that nO levels of government contillue 

expanding the array of e-government services proVided onilne, 88 well as the offoctlveness of onl!ne 

e-government platforms. Such investments will trigger greater growth in e-government services, resulting 

in government savings and benofits for the private sector 

In their jOint flUng in the NPB debate of December 4. 2009, the American Farm Bureau Federation and 

Connected Nation measured differences In adoption and usago of broadband service across rural 

and non-rural areas for both bUSinesses and reSidential consumers. Data from Connected Nation's 

2009 surveys in Tennessee and OhiO show a gap across rural and non-rural households in adoption 

of computers and broadband. While 81% of all houserlolds In non-rural areas report owning a horne 

computer, only 69% 01 rural respondents do. Slrnilarly, 47% of rurai low-income households (earning less 

than $25,000 annuaUy) roport owning r;omputeL compared to 56% of low-income non-rural households 

Among households with children, computer ownership rates go up, but the rural-non-rural gap IS stlH 

measurable: 81% of rural households With cfllldrGn report having a comput~r at horne, compared to 92% 

among non-rural respondents (Figure 2?)."k 

7.' C()flnected NatiiJ[) S NHP Cornmems .} lura! 

~"lbid_ page 3 
100 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 108 76579A.075

Figure 22: Computer Ownership Among Rural 

and Non-Rural Residents by Demographic 

All households Low-incomc 

househo[ds~ 

• Rural D Non-rural 

Households with 

children 

'; ow-illcP)1lc",.rl()u~'{;h'ijd'; viith tJprllB) housntvlld inr:omes bHlow 

Source: 2(;()f) Resld;::;r:tl8.i Tech;-]cJIO[N ASS8ss:nents (if TenneS$88 and Ohl() 

Broadband adoption trends show a similar pattern. While 64% of non~rurCiI households report subscribing 

to broadband In the home, only 47% of rural hous~)holds adopt Hle service While ?B% of low-income, 

rlC1n·fUf8! households (luhscnbe to the service, only of rural, iOI:V-InCCilDf, homes ciG so. Snnilarly. while 

76'1'0 of non-rural housoholds with children ropm! slJhscnblng to broad hand only fiO% of housoholds with 

ch!lciron in rllral 3JSaS have broadt1and at the horfln ' 

Importantly, this adoption lag in rural areas cannot be explained in full by a supply· side or network 

lnfrastructure gap. Figure 23 compares "take rates,·' or the percentagE:1 of broadband subscribers relative 

to all households that have broadband available to them (including those that report subscribing to 

broadband and triOse who do not subscribe but report ha.vlng broadband available at their hornes), across 

rural and non-rural areas in OhiO and Tennessee. The data show tnat wtlile 76% of non-rural dwellers with 

broadband access choose to subscnbe to the service. on IV 67% of rural dwellers that have broadband 

access subscnbe. ThiS represonts Significant gap that Illustrates the demc:md-slde challenge facinfj 

rural America" 

Figure 23: Broadband "Take Rates" Among Rural and 

Non-rural Residents Who Report Having Broadband Available* 

76% 
101 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 109 76579A.076

Technology adoption trends among businesses also measure a demand-side gap across rural and 

non-rural areas. Figure 24 indicates that, in 2009 in Tennessee and Otlio, 74% of rural businesses report 

owning a computer, compared to 79% among non-rural businesses, Broadband adoption among rural 

business lags behind, at 57%, compared to adoption rates of 62% among non-rural buslnesses.31 

Figure 24: Computer Ownership and Broadband 

Adoption among Businesses in Tennessee and Ohio 

• Rural businesses tl! Non-rural businesses 

Computer ownership Broadband adoption 

As was thn caSE) 31110n!] residential consunlers, this gap in broadband Ddoptlon IS not fully oxpl8inod 

by a lack of available broadband serVice, Among bUSinesses that have sorvlce ava!l8ble, "take 

differ across rural 8nd non-rural businesses, Figure 25 indic8tos "take rates" of 79% for rum! bUSinesses 

compared to 83% among businesses in non~rLJra! arfJaS,v 

Figure 25: Broadband "Take Rates" among Rural and 

Non-rural Businesses That Report Having Broadband Available* 

Rural businesses Noo-rural businesses 

These findings suggest th8.1 the lag In the adoption of broadband services among rural dwellers is fGal 

and cannot be explained solely dUG to the remaining gaps In infrastructure availability: that is, supply~ 

side factors. Dernand-side barriers to technology adoption and usage are a significant factor affecting 
102 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 110 76579A.077

this technology lag among rural populations. The National Broadband Plan should address both 

challenges simultaneously by subsidizing network buHd~out where private investment is unlikely to flow 

and by addressing demand~side barriers to adoption with measures aimed at building awareness about 

the benefits of broadband services for rural businesses and dwellers, expand digital literacy programs, 

promote computer ownership. and strengthen rural community anchor institutions' broadband capacity 

and services. JJ 

On December 11, 2009, Connectod Nation filed comments on the relationship between broadband and 

economic opportunity and its Impact on businesses.:-\j Our research illustrated that adoption patterns 

across businesses In different sectors can greatly vary. While 61% of all businesses surveyed adopt 

broadband service, different adoption p8.tterns exist across different sectors. Businesses within the higll~ 

tech sector are the most likely to adopt broadband (780/0), foUowed by Professional and Financial Services 

(76%), the Manufacturing sector (72%), and Wholesale and Transportation (64%). The sectors least likely 

to subscribe to a broadband connection are Hoalttlcare (43%), Agriculture, MirHng. Construction and 

Utilltios (AMCU. 50%). 811cJ RmJi!, HnCrD(,ltion. Food alld LocJoinq (liotat! & Hasp. 56%) 

Data from Tnnnt?ssee ond OhiO collected pmtc'llrHnQ to home-based businoss ownership shoo light into 

varYing patterns of usage and Bdoptlon by male 8nd female rlome-based bUSiness owners. Figure 26 

shows that 5% of all adults surveyed report bOing rlome business owners Of these, 62'% are male and 

38% are female (Figure 26) -'. 

Figure 26 

Percent of residents that 

own and oJlerate a business 

out of tbeir borne 

Among home businesses 

owners, percent male & female 

62% 

Male Female 
103 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 111 76579A.078

Home business owners on average are less satisfied with the speed of their broadband delivery than the 

average home broadband subscriber. While 52"1" of all home broadband subscribers are very satisfied 

with their broadband speeds, only 38% of home business owners are. Furthermore, female home 

business owners appear to be more satisfied than their male counterparts. Half of female home business 

owners report being very satisfied wl'th their connection. compared to 31 % of their male counterparts 

(Figure 27).'" 

Figure 27: Home business owners who are "very satisfied" 

with the speed of their broadband delivery 

52% 

All adult 

residents 

AU hOl1le business Female home Male home 

business owners business owners 
104 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 112 76579A.079

CONNECTED 

I 

Enabling Technology. 

Empowering People. 

® 

www.connectednation.org 
105 

Mr. BOUCHER. Well, thank you very much, Ms. Taylor, and 

thanks to each of our witnesses for joining us and sharing your 

views on broadband adoption. Ms. Mattey, I will begin my questions with you. 

I am of the view that Ms. Matsui has performed a real service, 

as has the FCC in putting forward its broadband plan in recommending an expansion of the Lifeline and Linkup programs under 

universal service so as to promote broadband adoption. But I think 

we have a challenge in understanding what that would cost. 

And to the extent there is a cost, the Universal Service Fund 

would have to be increased in order to accommodate that cost. So 

do you have any data about what the cost of her bill, for example, 

would be? Or what the cost of your recommendation as contained 

in the broadband plan would be for an expansion of Lifeline and 

Linkup? 

Ms. MATTEY. Thank you, Chairman. Actually as we were developing the recommendations on this, we came to realize that there 

was not sufficient empirical data that would enable us to project 

what increased demand would occur if we were to expand Lifeline 

to broadband, and that is precisely why the plan recommended that 

we first conduct a pilot in order to actually test and observe what 

would happen. And then we would be in a position to make a judgment as to the cost of a permanent implementation of the plan. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Well, that is a very interesting approach, and one 

that would reveal the data about what the real costs are. Do you 

have any suggestions for how that pilot should be structured? Do 

you have any thoughts about the numbers of homes that should be 

subjected to the pilot study and other parameters? 

Ms. MATTEY. We are just beginning to start to think about that, 

and, in fact, we are planning to have a workshop later in about a 

month or so where we will be exploring those questions, how many 

households, how you could test and compare. Obviously if you are 

doing a test, you need to have in essence a control group and then 

a group that actually obtains the subsidy and potentially subsidies 

of different levels and also test the impact of coupling the subsidy 

with programs for digital literacy or the provision of, for instance, 

computers in the private sector. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Well, I am glad that you are focusing on that. Let 

me suggest, if at all possible, that you accelerate by a good bit the 

formulation of a recommendation to us on that because we hope to 

be able to mark up soon the universal service reform comprehensive legislation that Congressman Terry and I have put forward. 

And we would like to make sure that the goals that Ms. Matsui has 

announced with regard to Lifeline and Linkup are reflected in that 

legislation. Our timeframe for doing that is fairly near term. So the 

sooner we get recommendations from you about how to structure 

an appropriate pilot to give us some reliable information about real 

costs, the better. Let me just leave that with you. 

Ms. Taylor, I have a question for you. I am concerned, and I 

know that many are, about the reliability of some of the state-created broadband maps revealing the availability of broadband. And 

the particular concern that I have is that many of the states relied 

upon data provided by the carriers with regard to where broadband 

was present and where it was not. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
106 

And it is both costly and time consuming to try to verify that 

data, and so in many instances, what appeared in the state-based 

broadband map was simply the data provided by the carrier. And 

I think what a lot of carriers may have chosen to do is simply say 

well, you know, we have—this is our service territory, and we are 

providing broadband. But it wasn’t a very granular examination, 

and there were vast areas in many of these instances where 

broadband in fact was not available. My own congressional district 

is a great example of that, and the Virginia map broadly overstates 

broadband availability in my district as compared to the actuality. 

So my question to you is this. I know you have done a lot of work 

in this area. Your organization has been contracted to help prepare 

broadband maps. Did you encounter this problem? And do we have 

a better way of learning where broadband really is available than 

simply relying on carrier-provided data? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Well, excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I think you speak 

to the heart of the issue, the mapping challenge, because—and it 

really speaks to how important, how critical the verification process 

is. Providers, we have found, submit good, solid data, but, as you 

mentioned, it is not always quite as granular as we would like it 

to be. And it is not always perfect because, quite frankly, providers 

don’t always know exactly where they can and cannot provide service until they actually go out and test the home. 

So that verification process on the ground is critical. You are 

right. It is time consuming. However we have found that it is well 

worth it because those locally accurate maps to get to that point, 

and we get to that point with the maps, through the verification 

process. And it takes multiple verifications, surveys on the ground, 

field tests. Consumer feedback through the web-based interactive 

maps is one of the best and least expensive forms of verification. 

Mr. BOUCHER. So where you have been contracted to prepare the 

map or participate in the preparation of it, there is some 

verification of the data that the carriers have provided? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Absolutely. 

Mr. BOUCHER. That is something you always do? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Absolutely. 

Mr. BOUCHER. OK, and would you agree that in those instances 

where carrier data alone is relied on, that leads to some rather significant inaccuracies in the map as a normal matter? 

Ms. TAYLOR. I would say that it varies from one carrier to the 

next. 

Mr. BOUCHER. But in some cases it would? 

Ms. TAYLOR. In some cases, it will, and verification is critical for 

that. 

Mr. BOUCHER. It is critical in all of these cases? 

Ms. TAYLOR. That is right. 

Mr. BOUCHER. OK. Thank you, Ms. Taylor. Ms. Chong, I would 

like to call on you for this. Unfortunately my time has expired, and 

we now have a series of seven recorded votes on the floor, and Mr. 

Stearns and I are going to try to finish at least our two sets of 

questions. So I will recognize him at this time. 

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And, Ms. 

Taylor, let me compliment you on your opening statement. I think 

when you mentioned that the demand was created so that minoriVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:17 Feb 01, 2013 Jkt 076579 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A579.XXX A579

rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
107 

ties outnumber Caucasians, you said, was that in the state of Tennessee? 

Ms. TAYLOR. That is right. It is. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes, so I think that pretty much says it all, that 

your not-for-profit organization is doing that. So when you go to 

look at the broadband plan and you see that the FCC has indicated 

time and time again that everybody involved with this, this is not 

a self-effectuating plan. But then again, you start to see the FCC 

move out and say they are going to pass legislation. 

So, Ms. Mattey, you acknowledged that pretty much this plan is 

not something that should be implemented by you folks, yet you 

have acknowledged that much of—in fact you said that much of it 

would require congressional action. But now Mr. Jenachowski and 

the FCC is moving out to move the Internet from Title I to Title 

II. And isn’t it disingenuous now for the FCC to say it must reclassify broadband to implement the plan? 

Ms. MATTEY. That is a question that I would defer to the general 

counsel and the chairman of the FCC. 

Mr. STEARNS. Can the FCC or the NTIA move forward with the 

digital literacy corporation program, corps rather—digital literacy 

corps program on your own, or do you need legislation? 

Ms. MATTEY. I believe that there needs to be appropriations to 

support such a corps. 

Mr. STEARNS. Is it your position now the FCC would not establish this digital literacy corps without congressional approval? 

Ms. MATTEY. I don’t know the answer to that question. 

Mr. STEARNS. OK. Ms. Chong, how many languages are taught 

in California? 

Ms. CHONG. In the school system? 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes. 

Ms. CHONG. Primarily English, but we do have a number of—— 

Mr. STEARNS. No, I am asking the total number. Besides English, 

how many language courses are taught? By this I mean a person 

comes in and does not understand English, so I assume you teach 

in Spanish in the beginning. 

Ms. CHONG. Yes. 

Mr. STEARNS. How many cases like that? Do you teach Mandarin 

Chinese? Do you teach many languages? How many do you teach? 

Ms. CHONG. I don’t know the exact number on that, but I would 

assume that it is a very large number. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes, we looked at it, and I think we said almost 

40. In this broadband plan, there is a—they are recommending a 

digital literacy portal. This would be something that probably you 

support, and I think you sort of mentioned this idea that everybody 

could go to the Internet and get to this digital portal to understand 

how to use the Internet and they impart digital skills. 

Would you realize that in this broadband plan that everybody 

should have the opportunity to get it in its native language? So 

again you would have to set up this digital portal to allow almost 

40 different languages, you know. So I mean all of you should perhaps see what Ms. Taylor says in her opening statement, that she 

is creating this demand through a not-for-profit organization. We 

don’t need the government to go in and set up a, you know, a digital literacy corps of people and then set up the Internet to teach 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
108 

them through their native language when it can be established by 

what Ms. Taylor says. 

Is that an accurate statement, what you are saying, Ms. Taylor, 

that this can be done through not-for-profit organizations that is 

creating a demand rather than going ahead and setting up—the 

government set up a digital literacy corps and set up a portal 

where they teach you in 40 some different languages? You might 

comment on this digital literacy corps and this native language 

that they want to set up on the computer. 

Ms. TAYLOR. Well, that, you know, the digital literacy corps is 

one of the many recommendations in the FCC plan that I think are 

worth considering. It is true that there have been great gains 

through nonprofit such as Connected Nation, such as One Economy, and this is—— 

Mr. STEARNS. I would think that would be a better approach 

than the government taking over and setting up the Web site, 

teaching native languages and so forth. I mean I would think your 

approach would be better. 

But anyway, let me ask you this question, Ms. Taylor. Toward 

the end of your written testimony, you suggest that network neutrality is not likely to promote broadband adoption or availability, 

and in fact it is distracting from more productive and cost-effective 

efforts. Could you elaborate on that? 

Ms. TAYLOR. Sure. We believe that it is imperative right now in 

the midst of these very complex policy issues that are being considered in Washington, that we don’t lose sight of the work that is 

taking place across the Nation, and that these discussions don’t 

take resources away from or undermine the efforts that are going 

on across the country in Tennessee and Ohio and other places. 

Really we believe that the two bigger challenges are getting 

broadband where it is not and solving this supply-side gap that we 

are talking about here today. You know the people in Coshocton 

County, in Perry County don’t care about reclassification. They just 

want to get their people connected, and they want to ensure that 

they have the resources for the programs to do so. 

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Stearns. We have 

about five minutes in total left to respond to these recorded votes. 

And I am told that all of the other members have agreed that they 

will not pose questions, but we want to offer Ms. Matsui an opportunity to pose hers. So the gentlelady from California is recognized. 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I mentioned in my 

opening statement, the recent FCC survey found that 28 million 

Americans do not subscribe to the Internet due to high costs of 

broadband-related services. The fact is the high cost of broadband 

leaves far too many lower-income families in urban and rural 

areas. 

Simply put, if you don’t have the Internet, you are really at a 

competitive disadvantage. Ms. Mattey, in the FCC studies, did the 

FCC find that the cost of broadband service and related installation 

costs are the number one reason why lower-income households do 

not subscribe to the Internet? 

Ms. MATTEY. Yes, we did. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
109 

Ms. MATSUI. Rivkah, have you heard of any examples at the local 

level about the cost of broadband services being a real barrier to 

adopting broadband at home? 

Ms. SASS. Yes, just about every single day, someone talks about 

the library as their only lifeline to the Internet because they have 

had to give it up for cost-saving reasons. 

Ms. MATSUI. Ms. Mattey, do you believe that Lifeline Linkup assistance for broadband will spur broadband adoption rates in urban 

and rural areas? 

Ms. MATTEY. Yes, I do. 

Ms. MATSUI. And, Rivkah, in your testimony, you alluded to the 

fact that my Lifeline for broadband proposal would go a long way 

to assist unadopters become adopters again. Could you elaborate on 

this point, and have you seen examples of this in Sacramento? 

Ms. SASS. Absolutely. I think your bill provides that opportunity 

in going a long way to getting those unadopters back on track with 

access. The costs for those who don’t have access to the Internet 

are growing exponentially because so many services are only available online, whether it is applying for a job, accessing governmental services, all—most of—we are trying to move to e-government. All of those things are impacted, so yes, it would help. 

Ms. MATSUI. OK, these are tough economic times, and anchor institutions like schools and libraries play an important role in 

broadband adoption. And as you indicated in your testimony, libraries are having a difficult time meeting demand as more and 

more hardworking Americans are now relying on computers at 

their local library to look for a job. 

Now, I understand that you are working in Sacramento to teach 

digital literacy skills to assist individuals with broadband adoption 

efforts, and I believe it is critically important to create a culture 

of broadband adoption and this starts at local forums like anchor 

institutions. 

Can you describe some of your efforts in digital literacy? And 

from your perspective, do you have enough computers in the Sacramento library system to meet demand during these challenging 

economic times? 

Ms. SASS. Thank you. Visits to our libraries in Sacramento, we 

have 27 locations, urban, suburban, and rural. Sacramento is a 

very diverse county. Visits are up about 50 percent over last year. 

So we are busy, and we are seeing more and more people who don’t 

have the skills or the access at home. So we are providing basic 

Internet classes. We are one of four libraries in the state. 

We have a 13.1 percent unemployment rate in Sacramento. We 

are one of four libraries that was part of a pilot program to teach 

job-seeking skills and help people find jobs using broadband. So it 

is incorporated into everything we do. We are in fact the de facto 

digital literacy corps. That is what librarians do and have been 

doing for the last 15 years. 

Ms. MATSUI. So you would also like some help with this too? 

Ms. SASS. We would like some help with it. We don’t have 

enough computers. We just opened a new library in suburban Sacramento, south Sacramento. It serves a very diverse, challenged 

community, high unemployment. There are days when, with a 10- 

megabit connection, the staff cannot do their work because the 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
110 

Internet usage between the wireless, all the public access computers, the loaning laptops, we are overwhelmed literally. 

Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Chairman, I completed my questioning. I really 

thank you very much. 

Mr. BOUCHER. Thank you very much, Ms. Matsui. Thanks again 

to all of our witnesses. We appreciate your testimony, and we may 

be consulting you individually as we continue our consideration of 

broadband adoption. Thanks to all the members for participating 

this morning. This hearing stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARING
111 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 119 76579A.080

Opening Statement for Hearing on 

"The National Broadband Plan: Promoting Broadband Adoption" 

for Rep. Kathy Castor, FL-ll 

Thursday, May 13th, 2010 

• Thank you, Chairman Boucher, for holding this hearing, and 

thank you to the witnesses here today. 

• I'm looking forward to their testimony. 

• The primary goal of the National Broadband Plan is to bring 

the tremendous power of the internet to more people. 

• There are lots of ideas out there about the best way to do this, 

and as you've heard today, there are many highly technical 

and controversial issues to consider. 

• I want to stay focused on the one idea that holds promise for 

accomplishing this goal-expanding the Lifeline and LinkUp programs in the Universal Service Fund. 

• This is important to me because there's an assumption that 

urban areas like mine have plenty of access to broadband. 

• As the National Broadband Plan highlights, cost is the #1 

reason given for not adopting broadband. 

• This makes sense to me. 

• When families are making decisions about what they can and 

can't afford, things like cable and internet are a pretty low 

priority. 

• We know that the adoption rate for households with an 

annual income of $20,000 or less is only 40%. 

• In contrast, households making more than $75,000 a year 

have an adoption rate of over 91 %. 

• This is where the digital divide lies. 

• It's not just a rural issue-it's an affordability issue. 

• To give you some perspective, the per capita income in my 

district is about $24,000 a year. 

• That's barely enough to get by. 

• Even more troubling, nearly 19% are living below the 

poverty line. 
112 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 120 76579A.081

• These hard-working families are doing everything they can to 

make ends meet, keep food on the table, and keep the lights 

on. 

• For many of us, broadband is a necessity. 

• We need it to stay connected at home, school, and work. 

• For hard-working families making less than $20,000 a year, 

broadband can seem like a luxury. 

• Expanding the Lifeline and Link-Up programs will address 

this gap head on. 

• Representative Doris Matsui's bill "The Broadband 

Affordability Act," which I co-sponsor, would require the 

FCC to establish a program like LifeLine and Link-up to help 

low-income users pay for broadband service. 

• I know there are a lot of students, teachers, parents, and 

grandparents in my district who will need our help putting 

broadband within reach. 

• I also want to reiterate that the Universal Service Fund has 

historically been a program that Florida pays a lot into and 

hasn't always gotten a lot out of. 

• I want to make sure that the new version of USF corrects this 

past discrepancy. 

• Reform of how we pay into the USF should address this 

concern. 

• Overall, I'm hopeful that we'll be able to bridge the digital 

divide by implementing the Plan. 

• Thank you all. I look forward to the testimony of the 

witnesses, and I yield the balance of my time. 

o