FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Adriano Espaillat U.S. House of Representatives 1630 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Espaillat: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is--or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Adriano Espaillat I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 241 Cannon House Office Building The Honorable Anna G. Eshoo Dear Congresswoman Eshoo: Washington, D.C. that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to connectivity for all Americans. The do so in practice. the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2--The Honorable Anna G. Eshoo I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Barbara Lee U.S. House of Representatives 2267 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Lee: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Barbara Lee I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Ben Ray Luján U.S. House of Representatives 2231 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Luján: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century coimectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Ben Ray Luj an I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Betty McCollum U.S. House of Representatives 2256 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman McCollum: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Betty McCollum I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Bobby L. Rush U.S. House of Representatives 2188 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Rush: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Conimission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has beencompiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline prograw's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Bobby L. Rush I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman U.S. House of Representatives 1535 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Watson Coleman: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is---or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Carol Shea-Porter U.S. House of Representatives 1530 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Shea-Porter: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Conimission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Carol Shea-Porter I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney U.S. House of Representatives 2308 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Maloney: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Cedric L. Richmond U.S. House of Representatives 420 Caimon 1-louse Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Richmond: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in. the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Cedric L. Richmond I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Colleen Hanabusa U.S. House of Representatives 422 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Hanabusa: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Colleen Hanabusa I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Danny K. Davis U.S. House of Representatives 2159 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Davis: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program--from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Danny K. Davis I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable David Scott U.S. House of Representatives 225 Cam1on House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Scott: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-frçm re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable David Scott I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Diana DeGette U.S. House of Representatives 2368 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman DeGette: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Diana DeGette I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Dma Titus U.S. House of Representatives 2464 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Titus: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumeis by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be--to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Dma Titus I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, v'v Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable Don Beyer Dear Congressman Beyer: Washington, D.C. that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the do so in practice. the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen 1119 Longworth House Office Building waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine And that will be our lodestar as we niove forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Don Beyer I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Doris Matsui U.S. House of Representatives 2311 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Matsui: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21S Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. it is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Doris Matsui I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pal THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable Earl Blumenauer Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Blumenauer: that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. 1111 Longworth House Office Building rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, arid your letter has been added to that record. improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Earl Blumenauer I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton U.S. House of Representatives 2136 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Norton: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, arid, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assi stance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Eliot L. Engel U.S. House of Representatives 2462 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Engel: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Eliot L. Engel I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF Dear Congressman Butterfield: U.S. House of Representatives 2080 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. The Honorable G.K. Butterfield that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable connectivity for all Americans. The digital divide, and, like you. I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run Commission adopted the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as do so in practice. waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to abusing this important program. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21st Century Page 2-The Honorable U.K. Butterfield I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Gene Green U.S. House of Representatives 2470 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Green: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, 1 am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program--from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Gene Green I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Grace F. Napolitano U.S. House of Representatives 1610 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Napolitano: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carrier to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Grace F. Napolitano I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1.2018 The Honorable Grace Meng U.S. I-louse of Representatives 1317 Longworth I-louse Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Meng: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Comm issiori adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving progmani audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Grace Meng I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan U.S. House of Representatives 2411 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Sablan: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Gwen Moore U.S. House of Representatives 2252 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Moore: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Gwen Moore I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Hakeem Jeffries U.S. House of Representatives 1607 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Jeffries: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Hakeem Jeffries I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Hank Johnson U.S. House of Representatives 2240 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Johnson: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will he our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Hank Johnson I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jamie Raskin U.S. House of Representatives 431 Cannon House Office Building Washington, i).C. 20515 Dear Congressman Raskin: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifuline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1 23 4,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited saniple alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this in1portant program. Page 2-The Honorable Jamie Raskin I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jan Schakowsky U.S. House of Representatives 2367 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Schakowsky: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to he a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than S 137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from imroving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jan Schakowsky I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, AjitV. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jared Huffman U.S. House of Representatives 1406 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Huffman: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program--from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jared Huffman I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jerry McNerney U.S. House of Representatives 2265 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear CongressmanMcNerney: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Rejbrm Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply i$n't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jerry McNerney I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Jim Costa U.S. House of Representatives 2081 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Costa: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low..quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jim Costa I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jim McGovern U.S. House of Representatives 438 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman McGovern: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jim McGovern I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, LL Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable John Delaney U.S. House of Representatives 1632 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Delaney: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable John Delaney I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable John Garamendi U.S. House of Representatives 2438 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Garamendi: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable John Gararnendi I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable John Yarmuth U.S. House of Representatives 131 Cannon I-louse Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Yarmuth: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to he a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. it is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-----or should be--to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable John Yarmuth I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Jose E. Serrano U.S. House of Representatives 2354 Rayburri House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Serrano: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to he a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and. abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Jose B. Serrano I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF The Honorable Judy Chu U.S. House of Representatives where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2423 Rayburn House Office Building Dear Congresswoman Chu: Washington, DC. that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected connectivity for all Americans. The digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run Commission adopted the rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen do so in practice. program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions 1,2018 which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21St Century Page 2-The Honorable Judy Chu I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS CoMMISsIoN WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Keith Ellison U.S. House of Representatives 2244 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Ellison: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Keith Ellison I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the U.S. House of Representatives Dear Congresswoman Roybal-Allard: the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 2083 Rayburn House Office Building waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as connectivity for all Americans. The And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected The 1-lonorable Lucille Roybal-Allard alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. Commission adopted the improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. Washington, D.C. 20515 improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be--to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21st Century Page 2-The Honorable Lucille Roybal-Allard I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Luis V. Gutiérrez U.S. House of Representatives 2408 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Gutiérrez: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory hut failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program--from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to ad.opting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Luis V. Gutiérrez I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 2441 Rayburn House Office Building The Honorable Madeleine Z. Bordallo Washington, D.C. that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected Dear Congresswoman Bordallo: where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the do so in practice. the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21St Century Page 2-The Honorable Madeleine Z. Bordallo I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected U.S. House of Representatives where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are The Honorable Mark DeSaulnier the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run Dear Congressmaii DeSaulnier: police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the connectivity for all Americans. The Washington, D.C. obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. Commission adopted the improve the administration of the Lifeline prograin-from re-empowering state commissions to do so in practice. Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as And that will he our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine abusing this important program. 115 Cannon House Office Building At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21st Century Page 2-The Honorable Mark DeSaulnier I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS CoMMIsSIoN WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Mark Pocan U.S. House of Representatives 1421 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Pocan: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake, That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a seJf-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Mark Pocan I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON 4fAlits'9L OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Mark Takano U.S. House of Representatives 1507 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Takano: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile brOadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenroiled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is--or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Mark Takano I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable Michael E. Capuano that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable Dear Congressman Capuano: Washington, D.C. connectivity for all Americans. The digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run Commission adopted the rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen do so in practice. program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the 1414 Longworth House Office Building the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lfeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21St Century Page 2-The Honorable Michael E. Capuano I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Mike Doyle U.S. House of Representatives 239 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Doyle: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subsëribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that wi]l be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Mike Doyle I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives The Honorable Nanette Barragan Washington, D.C. 20515 that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected Dear Congresswoman Barragan: where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen 1320 Longworth House Office Building Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Nanette Barragan I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Nydia M. Velazquez U.S. House of Representatives 2302 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswonian Velazquez: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, 1 am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goai is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Nydia M. Velazquez I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Paul Tbnko U.S. House of Representatives 2463 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Tonko: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deepiy committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will he our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Paul Tonko I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Peter A. DeFazio U.S. House of Representatives 2134 Rayhurn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman DeFazio: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Peter A. DeFazio I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, 11 AjitV. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Peter Welch U.S. House of Representatives 2303 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Welch: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2--The Honorable Peter Welch I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Rick Nolan U.S. House of Representatives 2366 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Nolan: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Ut Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission ftilfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be--to empower consumers, not companies. And that will he our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Rick Nolan I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Ro Khanna U.S. House of Representatives 513 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Khanna: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Rejbrm Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be--to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Ro Khanna I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 2004 Rayburn House Office Building Dear Congressman Brady: The Honorable Robert A. Brady that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Washington, D.C. 20515 consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to connectivity for all Americans. The the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run do so in practice. Commission adopted the rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lfeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Robert A. Brady I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Robert C. Scott U.S. House of Representatives 1201 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Scott: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to he a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Robert C. Scott I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Robin Kelly U.S. House of Representatives 1239 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Kelly: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Robin Kelly I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 2407 Rayburn House Office Building Dear Congressman Bishop: The Honorable Sanford D. Bishop that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Washington, D.C. Commission adopted the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run do so in practice. rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to abusing this important program. improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 20515 2017 Lifeline Reform FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions Order, 1,2018 which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Sanford D. Bishop I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run Dear Congressman Cohen: rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the The Honorable Steve Cohen do so in practice. U.S. House of Representatives 2404 Rayburn House Office Building police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the connectivity for all Americans. The Washington, D.C. 20515 And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. Commission adopted the improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lfeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Steve Cohen I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 439 Cannon House Office Building The Honorable Suzanne Bonamici Washington, D.C. Dear Congresswoman Bonamici: that baiTed Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the do so in practice. rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine at stake. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop We are currently reviewing the improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is--or should be---to empower consumers, not companies. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to 20515 2017 Lifeline Rejbrm Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support Page 2-The Honorable Suzanne Bonamici I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Ted Lieu U.S. House of Representatives 236 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Lieu: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2l Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Ted Lieu I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assi stance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The 1-lonorable Tern A. Sewell U.S. House of Representatives 2201 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Sewell: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $1 37 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goalis-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will he our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Tern A. Sewell I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1,2018 The Honorable Tim Ryan U.S. House of Representatives 1126 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Ryan: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Tim Ryan I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected The Honorable Tony Cárdenas U.S. House of Representatives Dear Congressman Cárdenas: where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable Washington, D.C. 20515 connectivity for all Americans. The program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to Commission adopted the police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 do so in practice. waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. abusing this important program. 1510 Longworth House Office Building Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lifeline Re/brm Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMIssIoN Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the 21st Century Page 2-The Honorable Tony Cárdenas I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Tulsi Gabbard U.S. House of Representatives 1433 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswonian Gabbard: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. Ii simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is--or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Tulsi Gabbard I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF U.S. House of Representatives 2058 Rayburn House Office Building The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Clarke: that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the do so in practice. rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 ob]igation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. 2017 Lfeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support We are currently reviewing the Page 2-The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1, 2018 The Honorable Zoe Lofgren U.S. House of Representatives 1401 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congresswoman Lofgren: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfeline Reform Order, which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. We are currently reviewing the record that has been compiled in response to that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to determine the best path forward, and your letter has been added to that record. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Page 2-The Honorable Zoe Lofgren I appreciate your continued interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.