 Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ranking member Thune, ranking member Wicker. Thank you for having me here. In the brief time I have, I would like to summarize four guideposts for National Spectrum Policy Strategy that can drive innovation and promote quality access to communications for all. The first guidepost is that we should center the public interest objectives set by Congress in our National Spectrum Strategy. The Telecommunications Act, Congress directed the FCC to design spectrum auctions with safeguards to protect the public interest and fulfill the goals of its foundational purpose to make robust communication service available for all Americans. The FCC's public interest objectives included promoting competition and economic opportunity, preventing excessive consolidations, providing opportunities for small businesses, especially minority and women-owned businesses, and ensuring there are limited spectrum airways effectively and efficiently serve the public's communications needs. We need Congress, the FCC, and NTIA to think creatively about how to best advance all of these objectives. For example, rural and tribal areas can benefit from small but creative policies. Just last month, the ranking member mentioned, Chairwoman Rosen-Warsold modified the FCC's spectrum licensing rules to increase spectrum access for small carriers and tribal nations. Congress could further close the access gap in tribal areas where the need is greatest, with simple direction to the FCC. It could mandate expanded use of tribal windows and auction rules, or it could mandate the use of CBRS style spectrum sharing through generalized authorized access systems for all federal spectrum on tribal lands. Guidepost number two is that we must adopt a balanced approach in spectrum access models. We're in the midst of a connectivity revolution. The average number of connected devices per home has risen from 11 in 2019 to 25 in 2021. These are smart TVs, doorbells, even washing machines that now rely on spectrum and mostly unlicensed spectrum. Even licensed services increasingly rely on unlicensed technology to offload their data on their congestive airways. And the unlicensed spectrum innovation known as Wi-Fi is so ubiquitous that most Americans think of it as synonymous with at home broadband. The demand on unlicensed and licensed spectrum underscores just how critical using a mix of access regimes is to meet national connectivity demands. Unfortunately, there are very few spectrum greenfield opportunities remaining. Every spectrum stakeholder must work together to enhance efficiency. The success of CBRS as a sharing regime demonstrates that as long as we are willing to follow the engineering facts and data where it leads, future spectrum band plans can create more opportunity for innovation and competition through a balance of shared, licensed, and unlicensed allocations. Number three, we should commit to a long-term spectrum plan. Thanks to the bipartisan efforts of Congress, the Trump administration and the Biden administration, wireless providers now have access to sufficient spectrum to deploy state-of-the-art 5G systems. Even though the industry is already looking to 6G and Wi-Fi 7, standards for these systems are still years away. Our 5G race with China now relies on carriers spending their money to deploy networks, not on new spectrum auctions. On both the industry side and federal side, now is the time to step back and carefully plan for the future. An 18-month expansion of auction authority will not allow the FCC and NTIA to do that careful planning. A long-term commitment by signaling that the FCC will have future auctions can give agencies and private stakeholders the nudge to develop thoughtful plans for the future of spectrum commercialization. Congress could even direct the NTIA to issue a report that identifies potential bands and how they may be structured for commercial use seeking to find the right balance between license and unlicense. And finally, number four, we must prioritize public interest needs when spending public revenue from auctions. The reality is that there are several national priorities in communications policy that private investment either won't or can't fund. Digital equity programs help knock down barriers to broadband adoption and help communities make greater use of their connectivity. Congress provided some funding for these efforts in the broadband infrastructure package, the bipartisan infrastructure package, but a more sustainable source of funding is needed. Public knowledge supports the Airways for Equity initiative, which proposes setting aside spectrum auction revenues to fund digital inclusion efforts. Completing next G911, finishing the work of Rip and Replace, and other proposals have also received bipartisan support as public interest funding needs, and they should be public interest funding needs. The bottom line is that these public interest objectives can and should be earmarked to be paid first from revenue auctions or auction revenues, using the public dollars to promote the health of the sector and help connect all Americans to critical telecommunications services. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.