根据下面资料，回答26-30题
Big Tech is back in the congressional hot seat. On Wednesday, the chief executives of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google will be questioned in a House judiciary antitrust subcommittee hearing.
This is perhaps the most important and high-profile conversation about monopolies since the Microsoft case of the 1990s. It could also be a major, multi-decade turning point in US antitrust policy. They want to curb not only Big Tech, but a number of other industries with dominant players—finance and pharmaceuticals—with more regulation.
If that happens, we should thank not only Washington, but state and local officials who have been challenging corporate power in their own backyards for several years. Well before antitrust became trendy, local communities were waging successful fights against corporate behemoths for practical rather than ideological reasons. Those battles have laid the groundwork for what may come at federal level.
There are countless examples of communities that have successfully waged such David and Goliath battles. Very often, they end up economically better off. Communities with a greater share of their economy in the hands of small businesses are better at solving problems collectively, says Stacy Mitchell, the co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. They also have higher levels of civic participation. "Just as we know that concentrated power corrupts democracy, the opposite is true," she says. "The more broadly economic decision-making is distributed, and the more say people have over their livelihoods, the more effective and engaged they are as citizens. "
Some believe policymakers should embrace creative destruction in a kind of Schumpeterian killing of what would surely be tens of thousands of small businesses in less productive sectors such as restaurants, services and personal care. They argue this would encourage workers to retrain and redistribute in the digital economy. But that runs into the problem that each generation of Big Tech companies seems to be able to do more with fewer people. A handful of very large, very rich companies that need fewer and fewer workers doesn't add up to an economy.
Allowing certain kinds of small- and medium-sized enterprises to fail not because they are unsuccessful, but because they are not high-growth digital enterprises, would be a mistake. Regions with a greater share of SMES have less income inequality and faster household income growth, according to research gathered by the ILSR. Small businesses tend to be embedded in a web of local and regional economic relationships with other businesses. This creates resiliency and also sparks innovation. Research shows that industries with a mix of firm sizes produce new inventions and processes at a faster clip. Indeed, this is an argument many Big Tech executives would put forward about Silicon Valley. It's that very ecosystem which helped launch generations of successful start-ups.
We can learn from Paragraph 3 that the efforts of state and local officials______

A have a national significance

B failed to challenge corporate power

C well served their political purposes

D go against the trend of antitrust