SmartTranscript of House Energy and Digital Infrastructure 2025-02-13 11:00am

[Member Bram Kleppner]: Alright. And we are live. [Chair Kathleen James]: Alright. Great. Welcome, everybody to house energy and digital infrastructure. It is Thursday, February thirteenth, and we are here with, Hunter Thompson from the Department of Public Service to get their feedback on h eleven. I'm representative Kathleen James from the Bennington four district. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: Scott Campbell from St. Johnsburg, Calgary, Essex. Richard Bailey, LaMoyle, two. Chris Morrow, Windham, Windsor, Benjamin. Michael Southworth, Caledonia, two. Christopher Howland, Rutland, four. [Member Dara Torre]: Tara Torrey, Washington, two. [Member Bram Kleppner]: Graham Klevner, Chittenden, thirteen, Burlington. Laura Spilling, Windham, two. Jack Walker, committee assistant. [Maria Royal]: Maria Royal, legislative counsel. [Member Bram Kleppner]: Jonathan Wolford, Primer Piper on behalf of the smaller independent telephone companies. Thank you. [Chair Kathleen James]: Great. Thank you. Alright. And for the record? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: For the record, I am Hunter Thompson, the director of telecommunications with the public service department. [Member Dara Torre]: Alright. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: So I I don't have nearly as much as Christine. I will say before I give a couple brief statements that I'm a beautiful executive branch public servant. So with regards to h eleven, I think we're gonna start with Yeah. The department's stance is that we feel that we already get these complaints. Our soft authority allowed us to resolve the majority of these issues. And this bill codifies work we're already doing. And while we are not opposed to it, we do not necessarily feel it is necessary. We'll be trying to go into that more. But that's the that is the stance of the Department of Public Service as it relates to h one. [Chair Kathleen James]: Representative Sebelius might have some questions, but I do. I see. So Okay. I don't think we've had the chance beyond just a brief, you know, a brief one zero one testimony in the first week of the legislature to learn about, you know, how you guys receive public complaints. Is it a hotline? Is it an online form? How many do you receive? I you may not be prepared to talk about that today, but I I'd like to know I'd like, I guess, to learn about your role in receiving and solving consumer complaints. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: So the answer to those are yes. It's a hotline. It's a web form. It is referral from the attorney general's office. And for broadband complaints, referrals from the Vermont Community Broadband Board. All those mechanisms are in place. The complaints come in. They get aggregated in the CAPI division, consumer assistance, and public information. They get entered into our tracking system. I did not get the number of the total complaints that we have received from the companies. And then there are specialists within the CAPI division network to resolve these specific complaints, and they reach out to us, the individual that they've been as a subject matter experts where we're able to exert our soft authority or use the connections that we have with private contractors or for profit businesses to say, hey. What's going on? Can we get this fixed? [Chair Kathleen James]: So you work as sort of a liaison between individual Vermonters who are having a problem and the companies. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Yes. Yes. That's definitely as it relates to broadband, yep, and telecom issues. [Chair Kathleen James]: And what kind of complaints do you get? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: We get a litany of complaints. I will speak about a couple that we just got involved. So over the summer, certain companies strung a lot of fiber. They used other state contractors, and there's a lot of fiber left across lawns. Right? If if it was hooked up to a pole, it was hooked up to a house, but it was never actually left up the ground. We would get those type of complaints where someone said, you know, there's still a piece of fiber across my lawnmower. So they would be back in two days to put it up. I'm gonna start running over it with my lawnmower. So they have to replace it if they don't fix it. So we'd be able to reach out to our contacts and say, what's going on? This contractor didn't put fiber in the air. Can you please work on this and make a plan? And reach out to get periodic updates to say, how many of these are there across the state? Well, you've got a thousand of them. How long do you think it's gonna take? Where are you starting? Why did it happen? Is this not gonna happen again? Again. So we're gonna do stuff like that. Another way we work is another complaint with number porting. So we have a disagreement and some issues with porting a telephone number from one provider to another. We stepped in and we got involved and we both kind of negotiated with both providers and said, number porting is not optional. This is a requirement by the FCC. What do you need to port the number? Will you please provide this information? Can we track this process? And, you know, the the news for that is that number was actually reported this month or last night in the Gulf, which was the date that we finally got the agreement to say we'll be put in place. [Chair Kathleen James]: And how many folks work on your team ish? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: There are three of us full time. There's myself, director. We have a communications coordinator. We have a fiber optics engineer, and we have a part time temp who does some GIS workforce. [Chair Kathleen James]: And I'll let other people go ahead and I'm I'm on a roll. I have so many questions. And just my final thing, you may have mentioned this. Do you then publish a report on or is there a dashboard about here's how many complaints we received? Here's the companies they were lodged against. Here's how quickly they were resolved. Here's the ones we weren't able to resolve. Here's the categories they fall under. Is that information that that anybody at the any member of the public could see? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I believe that is something that the CAPI division publishes. That's not something we publish specifically in telecom, but I think that's all information that CAPI has. We have to figure out how they get it out to the public. [Chair Kathleen James]: Okay. I'd I'd love to follow-up on that and to see to learn more about how they what data they track, how they publish it, how it's available to the public, and then have us be able to take a look at it too. I'd be really [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: I think that'd be relevant. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I have some examples of what data we track through at least two big providers, CCI and Comcast, because we have an incentive rate plan with CCI, and then we have a PUC rolling with Comcast, which dictates the stuff that they need to send us on a quarterly basis. So with CCI, it's information like having a service cover cleared within forty eight hours, having a service cover cleared within forty eight hours for the business people, the number of calls answered within twenty seconds, installation appointments that were done on time for residences and business, average days of delay for missing appointment. So this is all public information that's sent to the PUC under a predefined cadence, and then we will look at that. And then with Comcast, stuff called again, calls answered. I think they have thirty seconds. Again, how long is it supposed to perform on time? Advanced notice of late appointments and other metrics that we collect for both those state providers. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Representative Segalley? And is that so I'm checking in for a minute. Yeah. I I apologize. I was looking down at some additional information. Did I hear you correctly say that such department's position that this is not a necessary bill? Was that what you're talking about? Or was it a certain position? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Department feels that we already get these complaints, and our soft authority allows us to resolve most of these issues. This bill codifies work that we feel we're already doing. And while we are not opposed to it, we do not necessarily feel it is necessary. Okay. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: So you're not opposed to it. Okay. Great. Sorry about that. I'm I'm [Witness Hunter Thompson]: a beautiful executive brand executive. [Chair Kathleen James]: That's excellent. Not just might not be necessary. Rep, Tori, then I wanna learn a little bit more about soft display. Have [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: a question. Oh, okay. Go. So you talked about data that is being collected from Consolidated and Comcast. How about from the wireless providers? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I would have to ask the CAPI division. I think that these two pieces of data are collected specifically through the incentive rate events that we have with CCI as well as fifty nine zero three, which doesn't make sense to anyone. Does not have the PSD or PUC, but it's a PUC rule that says we get this from Comcast. I can check to see if you mean the big wireless like Verizon, T Mobile, and AT and T? [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: I mean, I guess I guess just, you know, anyone who's providing broadband. But, I mean, I know that that those were the kind of the two big wired entities. And is that data like, who audits that data? So, I mean, there's it's self reporting. Right? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I don't believe it's already in self reporting. I will give you the answer on if we collect this information from. I I I I made no progress. [Member Dara Torre]: Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. Just back to the one zero one introduction to your work. Could you remind me or inform me how you guys are funded? Do you get most of your funding from general fund, or do you also get some [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I believe we get our funding from the fees that we charge to the various providers. Sounds good. I don't know where that went. So it's certainly not in my pocket, but let [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: me see. As well. Yes. Yes. Going back to I don't know. I missed this section, but it's on page eleven of the bill. And they keep Vermonters connected. So this follows along with one of the COVID regulations. This is about prohibiting from disconnecting during emergency for charging and constantly high prices. So based on your initial testimony, you are not opposed to [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: the end of this. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: For this though. Okay. That's Great. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Does not for this mean you support that? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: That's that's [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: me or rather the product. Well, I hear you. [Chair Kathleen James]: As a department. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: As a department, we are not a not a post. We don't feel it's necessary to deny a post. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Okay. Great. Ask and answer. Mhmm. Not opposed is I'm registering that. That is the position of the department is that they are not opposed to this bill. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: There there are there is is more to that too, though. [Chair Kathleen James]: Yeah. The [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: We're only we're picking. It the the entire statement says they're not opposed [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Yeah. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: But they do not feel it's necessary. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Correct. That's right. But I have had the experience, representative, of having not necessarily this department, but I've had the position the experience of having the administration say that and then say something different and then turn up opposed. So that's why I'm [Chair Kathleen James]: wanting to be It's good that we'll be having a little time for our committee discussion about the letter from the speaker because I believe that mister Thompson has answered the question that we asked him. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I do. [Chair Kathleen James]: And committee discussion is a different thing. We'll be talking about that. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I do have a couple issues that we need to take with some specific some specific portions of it. So five one, failing to provide a consumer with broadband service that meets or exceeds the performance characteristics offered in solar. To the consumer's service location, Feel that needs work. That is largely not how these networks are are designed, I think, from a technical standpoint. I'll use an example. Don't feel your has roughly ten thousand people in it. One of the providers is offering a two gigabyte solution. So if you were to do the math of ten thousand people living in two gigabytes simultaneously up and down, The math says that that provider would need to have a twenty terabyte circuit to provide that level of service. Okay. And I don't believe that is the case with any provider in the model. So for rat brands, there's about five thousand executive branch employees in the general Montpelier campus, you know, Montpelier Street House of International Life. All five thousand of those employees are served by a single five gigabyte circuit. So I feel like it hasn't been really discussed. I don't think Christine really addressed it, but if you were to insist that a provider be able to provide the maximum amount of bandwidth that they advertise to every user simultaneously, it's technologically prohibited to actually have that happen. I don't know if that's the intent of that particular line, but oversubscription is a common thing. It could be asked could ask Comcast, ask CCI, ask Charter, ask any of the big providers about subscription, and it's telling you the network is designed for a certain number of users at a certain certain time. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: There's section page or line numbers. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I find that I didn't write the page. I have a Five. One. [Maria Royal]: I'm five for seven. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Well, the other issues that we have is the the data cap issue. Not as it relates to fixed wireless, as it relates to mobile broadband. I think there's potentially some unintended consequences with that language. I don't know what they are as I'm not a provider, but I think that the potential for removing a data cap could either drive up prices or cause a hard stop when that threshold is reached. So rather than rather than saying I get five peaks of data with my cell phone plan and then my speeds are throttled, This is complete projection on my part. I get five gigs of data. If I block five gigs of data, and after that five gigs of data is used, I would have to go buy another block of data. Right? I feel that there's some potential unintended consequences there because that data is paid for by someone, often paid for by the consumer. And I think I don't know if I have the opportunity to give my stump speech to this particular committee. The primary users of prepaid cell phone plans are lower income families and economically disadvantaged families. And having those people cut off when they hit a certain threshold to avoid a data cap issue is detrimental in my opinion. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Yeah. Again, I I don't the p do we have the page number? I know this is and I'm like, oh, that is a six. I did. Right. Page six. Eight. But the Yes. So this is the section that's talking about not posing a data cap except when tailored for the purpose of reasonable network management, such as managing network congestion. And so, presumably, the caps on that those plans that you're talking about will be considered reasonable network management. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I will come in as a technical person with an engineering degree, and I'm against that. Right? Because the cap is not time based. So how on big plate could someone say that all of us can use our five gigs of data simultaneously with no throttling until one of us reaches five point one gigs and then throttle. Right? How is the network okay ten seconds before and not okay ten seconds after simply because one of us reached that five k threshold. That's from an engineering technical standpoint. I I don't think perhaps they are related to I don't think in good faith you can say that the taps are related to to performance or anything. Right? Because they're they're not based on when things are happening. They're based on consumption. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: So I wanna make sure I understand what you're saying, because I'm not sure that I do. So There you go. In this what are you saying about this? Maybe that would be [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I'm saying I don't believe there's a good faith argument to say that data caps are related to network performance management because if how can I say it again? If we're all using the same if we're all using our maximum amount of data Yeah. And the network is performing okay Yeah. And then my threshold crosses from using my maximum amount of data to an extra megabyte, how is how can you say that the network is not gonna perform okay even though it did five minutes before? Okay. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: So then makes sense. If we so are you arguing that the except when tailored for the purpose I shouldn't say arguing. Are you suggesting that except when tailored for the purposes of reasonable network management, such as managing network congestion, should come out, and it should just be that there will not be a data cap? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I'm saying that I don't believe that data caps are to manage network congestive from a technical standpoint. I don't believe that that's a valid argument to say that we have a data cap. Someone else can speak to that. I mean, you guys are gonna get Okay. CTIA in. Right? Those guys will speak to that on forum. Yeah. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: And, you know, there's also that you testified. But I again, I I I do wanna make sure. I'm not sure that I'm quite getting it. So you are saying that there is no means of managing there's no reasonable network management. She means I'm using a cap. Can I Yeah? I don't know if this is appropriate, but could I ask legislative council if if she understands if she could I I Yeah. So I don't know if it's appropriate or not. I'll do that. [Maria Royal]: For the record, Maria Royal, I think I understand what's being said. I don't know enough about the technology. So I think what Hunter is saying that data kept, which aren't necessarily associated with a period of time, will not correlate with any kind of network management necessarily. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Yes. [Maria Royal]: And so there might not be a reasonable network management rationale for imposing a data cap. [Chair Kathleen James]: Right? Maybe Okay. Campbell? [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: Oh, yeah. No. I'm trying to understand this too. So what is the rationale for putting a data cap? What's your rationale for data caps? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I don't know. I don't I don't think I'm the person who wanted to answer that question. K. There's no [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: there's no as far as you know, there's no sort of engineering reason for inputting data caps. [Member Bram Kleppner]: Is that [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: is that is that am I understanding that correctly? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I'm saying that a data cap is not [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: a valid In In this management solution for Right. Well, so what I'm asking is is as an engineer, is there any engineering reason for when it goes into the cap? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Not doing any of the knowledge. K. Thank you. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Question for I just it's coming back to me now from a long time ago on all of this. I think we will hear this from industry that they need this as a network. We can't prevent them from having data counts because they need to manage their network. [Chair Kathleen James]: Well, let's we can direct those questions to them when they come. I [Member Bram Kleppner]: think what I'm hearing is that someone who has a five meg plan is not likely to run out of that at the moment a network operator needs to throttle because everyone has jumped on at the [Witness Hunter Thompson]: same time. Yes. Thank you. K. This is. I dropped. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Thank you. [Chair Kathleen James]: Alrighty. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: Well, that was a bit of tax portion. And yeah. That was it. Some of the two pieces I took away from the technical standpoint that we have concerns on working building. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: That's it. [Chair Kathleen James]: Alrighty. Thank you for being here. I know we'll see you this afternoon. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: See my [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: comment. What's the other bill? [Chair Kathleen James]: Oh, I'm sorry. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: We can make that one quick. [Chair Kathleen James]: Apologies. No. I just was spacing. Yep. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: So once again, Martin Thompson, with regards to two one one one. As a beautiful executive branch employee, you feel that that bill has sent unintended consequences, and we feel the department has laid out and reported laid out a plan to address affordability in the ten year bill health plan. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Okay. What's the question? Representative Morrow. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: Can you tell us that those unintended consequences might fade? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I think Christine probably done very well in her previous small liberal supporting role. I think that would take rates for some of the CGE providers. I know there's a question about who it will potentially impact. So in addition to impacting the providers that we're on more impact, like consolidated communications, Comcast, Charter. It would also impact EC Fiber. And, actually, I think it would impact Burlington Telecom. These providers often provide their own one off plan. Comcast has their ten dollar plan. Freedom has a thirty five dollar plan through Whitefly and Spectrum offers a twenty dollar plan. A month with Burlington Telecom or EC Fiber continue to offer subsidized plans. But after the ACP ran out last year, both of those have continued to offer a subsidized plan for low income for Montrose. [Chair Kathleen James]: Representative Clefritz? [Member Bram Kleppner]: So I heard this in the coat room from a lobbyist. So apply whatever coefficient of reliability you feel appropriate to this information. But what I was told was that the requirement to provide an affordable plan in New York was the only reason that AT and T stopped providing fixed wireless service. I would be interested if anyone has a sense of whether that's accurate or not, and I would also be interested if we feel that any of the providers that you've listed by are at risk for deciding not to offer fixed wireless if they are required to offer a an affordable plan. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I wouldn't speculate as to what the providers would do. I know that we have other fixed wireless providers within the state. We have a US cellular presence in the southern part of the state. T Mobile offers fixed wireless in some places in the state, Verizon offers fixed wireless in other places in the state. DETAIL Wireless office offers fixed wireless. I know there's a company in the Northeast Kingdom around Burke who recently went out of business that previously offered fixed wireless. So they did have a presence, but I'm not sure what impact this bill would have, and I I would be remiss to make assumptions about why AT and T stopped offering fixed wireless in the state of New York. [Chair Kathleen James]: Representative Morris? [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: There's some place where you can get a list of all the companies that provide. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: If you can't, you just ask me, and I will take you that list. Great. So requested. [Chair Kathleen James]: Duly noted. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: And you provided us with those sheets that you are reading from for our community. My notes. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: These notes are not Facebook published. This is a transitory document, and I'm using to to help, so I don't forget what you thought. [Chair Kathleen James]: You know, I think it would be helpful if you could just submit a one pager Absolutely. Couple paragraphs on the department's position on this bill so we have it for our website so that we have something in writing. And then I think we will definitely look forward to seeing from your information on your public complaint resolution and reports. Yeah. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: So I think in New York, it was their fixed wireless. I think that's what you said. And is fixed wireless run off of fiber, or is it run off ESL? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: So fixed wireless, the backhaul for fixed wireless, my assumption would be fiber because it's largely run off of an existing cell tower. So the cell tower backhaul is a few different. We attempted to do new backhaul with DSL during the cover call. So it proved not to be up to the task of running backhaul even though we're. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: I'll have to go back and look, but I thought that I had read that the that that New York case with AT and T saying they're pulling out had was connected to their desire to repair the copper there. That's why I was asking a question about technology. I'm not sure that that's the case. I don't know. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: So that that does bring up that the kind of fit here with with one twenty one is that in some of these objections that only have copper running there, even if it's bonded, it might be unrealistic to achieve those speeds. I know there was a provision in there that said if the thousand speeds were were unattainable, but I just think some of that stuff, there's flushing down. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: So I'm I'm I'm trying to understand the relevance of of fixed fixed wireless discussion to this bill because it's something that they bought it. I mean, when I was reading, if I seem to primarily cover wire. So he and what am I missing here? [Witness Hunter Thompson]: I didn't see a distinction in the valve from [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: It wasn't a distinction. No. But it's instant. But it's why why the emphasis on fixed wireless? I guess, is what I [Witness Hunter Thompson]: think most of the emphasis on fixed wireless because AT and T publicly pulled out of New York and said it was due to [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: the They do due to the separate service. AT and T [Witness Hunter Thompson]: said that it was due to their their bill, which required you to enter. Sorry. Yeah. AT and T Wireless, when they pulled out of New York, they explicitly said that it was because this bill was processed. Okay. So that that that. [Vice Chair R. Scott Campbell]: K. [Chair Kathleen James]: Any more questions for mister Thompson? Thank you for being here. I know we'll see you at one thirty for our joint hearing on the telecom finance. And, can we if you could hang around a minute and if we could stay on live? [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: We have some housekeeping. Thank you. Thank you. [Chair Kathleen James]: Yeah. Thank you so much for being here. Here. [Witness Hunter Thompson]: See you this afternoon. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: I see here. We both have a moment. Let's see. They [Chair Kathleen James]: all of many chairs have received [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: a letter from the speaker [Chair Kathleen James]: that is already logged in my inbox. [Speaker 7 ]: Okay. Let's see. [Chair Kathleen James]: Okay. So we have all the chairs have received a a letter from the speaker, and let's see. So I wanted to hit some highlights. And this is not based on I I think none of this is based on it's not specific to any committee. I think this is just a general, like, procedure and decorum reminder that the speaker's office is sending out to all the chairs to make sure that we're all hearing the same information and, you know, doing the right thing. So, let's see here. Attendance, we appreciate members getting to the committee on time. Your presence in committee is important. If you're going to be late, please let your chair know. And I would say also please let Jack know if you're gonna be late. And remember that we need a quorum to start committee work. So I don't really don't feel like we've had any issues with that, but that's a good reminder from the speaker. So if you're gonna be late, let let me and and Jack know. And as a reminder, we do have a committee calendar that Jack is keeping if you've got a day when you're gonna be working from home or you're out or something like that. Hallway noise. Members in every committee have noted that hallway noise has been impacting committee work this year. The speaker wants to let us know that she is gonna be talking to the sergeant at arms, and they're gonna be getting more signs up. I think that and having the doorkeepers doing more rounds, to help keep the noise down. And so for us, I think the card room probably in the hallway is our thing. But asking us all to remember that if we're standing outside somebody's committee, yakking, that we might be impacting other committees as well. Agenda planning. This comes up every year. Sounds like it's a perennial. Please make sure you have enough time scheduled from each of the witnesses, and that we should be respectful of the time that we've allotted to a witness, and try to avoid sharing personal stories and focus on succinct focused questions. And that actually gets to the larger thing about witness interactions. So it it sounds like, I and I'm feel very confident saying that that hap hasn't happened here, but it sounds like there have been some interactions with witnesses in subcommittees this year. House or senate did have been a little bit combative. And, so the speaker wants us all to remember, that especially when, committee members, or when witnesses or members of the general public, we may have not had that [Member Dara Torre]: here in [Chair Kathleen James]: our committee yet, but folks come in sometimes to share their work. They might be coming in to share their personal stories, their life experience. It's very important to remember that those folks are it it can be honestly scary and intimidating to come and testify before house committee, and that we need to be very wary of not putting witnesses in the hot seat. It's a little bit different when we're you know, we have we have a lot of so far in our committee, we've had professional folks. Right? We've had we've had professional advocates. We've had professional lobbyists. We've had professional representatives. We've had secretaries and commissioners. And so we are absolutely here to hold folks accountable and get our questions answered, but respectful questions. And then one thing that I I do wanna remind our committee of, and I'm I'm as guilty of this as anybody else. So the witnesses are here to provide information about what we've asked them to come and testify about. So that's the time when we are supposed to ask them questions about their subject matter and what we've asked them to come testify on. So it's not supposed to be a time when we debate with them or when we start our committee debate. And the speaker said, and I quote, there's a difference between witness testimony and committee debate. Members should share their experiences and opinions during committee discussion. Focus on succinct focus questions. So, as a new chair and as a whole new committee, it sounds to me like that's probably something that we should try to be a little bit more diligent about. So when we've got a win that doesn't mean I don't think we have to be paranoid about asking our questions. I just think it means let's ask our questions, let's get them answered, and then let's let folks go, and then we can have then we can talk about the bill. And feedback always welcome about how we're doing with time management and scheduling our witnesses. Because we I think we're a really engaged committee. I think we should be super proud of them. I've been trying to air on allowing more time to make sure everybody has time. That may mean that sometimes our agenda feels gappy, you know, like we're done, and then we don't have something for twenty minutes or half an hour. I I'm feeling like that's better than cutting people off, but feedback, welcome now or at any time. I think yeah. [Ranking Member Laura Sibilia]: Yeah. I would just say having been here, I I appreciate that ability for us if we're in something and having that discussion. And I think it's a it's a fine art, madam chair, that you are you are moving us through in committee what is the appropriate amount time, but I appreciate having more time than hitting a wall. And I've had that experience where you're having really important conversation. We [Chair Kathleen James]: stop. Okay. So, anyway, just keep the feedback coming. Any questions or comments about the speaker's update? [Member Dara Torre]: Yeah. Just that it's timely. Yeah. Because we are getting our feet under ourselves. And also that the witness flag, I I feel, made me think about our guiding principles and how we might wanna articulate how we I think we've already set a great precedent with the introductions that we [Witness Hunter Thompson]: do Mhmm. [Member Dara Torre]: For everyone in the room. Yeah. But I think maybe we could actually articulate how we want to respect weaknesses when we, in in the hot seat. So I'd be willing to take a stab at that. [Chair Kathleen James]: That'd be great. To that evolving document. That'd be super. Okay. Alright. I think we can go off live then, and I am going to

Play Clip Play Full Video Pause

SmartTranscript of House Energy and Digital Infrastructure 2025-02-13 11:00am

This is useful for seeing what happened at the meeting without wading through the whole transcript: