The federal program intended to bring broadband internet to rural areas is moving into a new phase as states propose how they plan to use billions in grant funds under a new set of guidelines issued by the Trump administration this summer.<\/p>\n
Now that most states have submitted their final plans for grants from the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment, or BEAD program, some Democrats are worried the grants will no longer be the broad fix for internet access they were intended to be when the program was created in the 2021 infrastructure law.<\/p>\n
More changes could be coming. On Thursday the House Energy and Commerce\u2019s subcommittee on Communications and Technology plans a hearing on a slate of 29 bills on broadband deployment and permitting. One would prohibit states from discriminating in broadband regulations based on what technology, such as fiber or satellite, is used to provide equivalent service and another would exempt repairs or replacement of communications facilities after a disaster from environmental reviews.<\/p>\n
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration said in early September that out of 56 eligible states and territories, 36 had submitted final draft BEAD proposals, while 20 have been granted \u201cshort-term extensions.\u201d<\/p>\n
The proposals are based on updated guidance NTIA issued in June to remove a variety of regulations put in place by the Biden administration for the $42.5 billion program, including a preference for fiber optic cable broadband.<\/p>\n
Rep. April McClain Delaney, D-Md., who helped oversee the initial BEAD rollout while a deputy assistant secretary at NTIA, said she thinks the broadband projects under the new rules will not be as \u201cscaleable or resilient as fiber.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe hard part is that in restructuring this very carefully rolled-out program, they\u2019re rushing it, and I believe that they are actually going to result in having more expensive service for our rural and underserved communities,\u201d McClain Delaney said.<\/p>\n
House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., said he was frustrated by the pace of the original program, but glad the delay gave the Trump administration a chance to rework the grants.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey passed the BEAD program and spent four years without spending any money,\u201d he said, going on to add that \u201cThere was nothing built with the BEAD money.\u201d<\/p>\n
At a House Small Business Committee hearing on Sept. 3, the panel\u2019s Chair Roger Williams, R-Texas, praised the Trump administration\u2019s revamp of the eligibility criteria, which covered labor, climate change, and net neutrality factors.<\/p>\n
\u201cBroadband deployment must be free from political interference,\u201d he said. \u201cThat is why I am encouraged by the steps taken by the Trump administration to reduce red tape, lower costs, and accelerate broadband deployment, ultimately improving connective opportunities.\u201d<\/p>\n
The shift away from fiber-preference, in which NTIA asked states to prioritize the lowest cost options for providing broadband to rural areas, opened more BEAD grants to satellite and fixed-point wireless internet. That move has raised attention about the role Starlink, the satellite internet service owned by billionaire Elon Musk, might play under the new rules.<\/p>\n
The committee\u2019s ranking member, Rep. Nydia M. Vel\u00e1zquez, D-N.Y., called fiber \u201cthe best technology around\u201d and satellite technology \u201cuntested.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI am concerned that the administration is missing the realities of satellites, namely that it cannot effectively match the speed, reliability, and capacity offered by fiber,\u201d she said, adding that \u201cit seems like this change will make BEAD focus more on cheap work than on good work.\u201d<\/p>\n
Williams, in his questioning, tried to guide witnesses towards support for the new rule, asking Kristi Westbrock, CEO and General Manager of Consolidated Telephone Company in Minnesota, \u201chow important is it for federal broadband programs to take a technology-neutral approach such as allowing fiber, wireless satellite, and other solutions to compete based on what best fits each community\u2019s needs?\u201d<\/p>\n
Westbrock said \u201cwe believe that there\u2019s room for all technologies,\u201d but added \u201cin my professional opinion, fiber broadband is the answer.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI also want to make sure that in the BEAD program that the dollars are spent . . . well and that we\u2019re not back asking for additional dollars because one of the technologies didn\u2019t stand up for the long haul,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
The satellite broadband industry is led by Starlink, a division of Musk\u2019s company SpaceX. Amazon\u2019s Project Kuiper service, which is not yet commercially available, has also been selected for BEAD contracts in some state proposals.<\/p>\n
McClain Delaney criticized what she said looked like a political reward for companies whose leaders are allied with President Donald Trump.<\/p>\n
\u201cDon\u2019t preference private contractors that are friends over companies that will best serve the community,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Fiber vs. satellite and wireless <\/p>\n
Supporters of fiber internet worry that the preference for low-cost bids will keep fast, reliable internet out of reach for rural customers and require more congressional action down the road.<\/p>\n
Satellite and fixed-point wireless have lower upfront costs, making it easier for those internet service providers to bid less than fiber providers, who have to put cables in the ground to reach homes and businesses in rural areas. But the higher initial cost of fiber, supporters say, pays for a long-term promise of service.<\/p>\n
\u201cOnce you build it, you leave it in the ground, it will remain useful for 30, 50 years, generations,\u201d according to Drew Garner, director of policy engagement at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, a foundation focused on promoting inclusive broadband policy.<\/p>\n
But, Garner said, satellite and wireless internet need \u201congoing maintenance and updates to meet user needs,\u201d which can mean greater costs to subscribers.<\/p>\n
Guthrie argued satellite will be helpful in getting internet to rural users sooner rather than later.<\/p>\n
\u201cWould you rather have fiber to your home a decade from now, or access to internet . . . within this year?\u201d Guthrie said. \u201cAnd I think that\u2019s what the tradeoff is.\u201d<\/p>\n
Other uses for BEAD funds<\/p>\n
Last month, McClain Delaney and nine other Democratic House members sent a letter to NTIA emphasizing the importance of allowing states to use BEAD funding for nondeployment purposes as originally intended, including broadband mapping and adoption programs. The letter asked NTIA to clarify whether and how states can use BEAD funds for these adjacent activities.<\/p>\n
\u201cBroadband deployment is critical; however, its long-term success requires parallel investments in the foundational nondeployment activities that enable effective implementation and adoption,\u201d the letter said.<\/p>\n
Last month NTIA indicated, without giving a timeline, that it plans to issue submission instructions for nondeployment projects. However, it also claimed earlier this month in an announcement that under its new rules, \u201cstates are already projecting savings of at least $13 billion for American taxpayers.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to a Democratic Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity said their state\u2019s proposal shifted how much of its allocation will go towards deploying broadband internet to users, from 100 percent to about half. The aide said some states are concerned the Trump administration could try to take back the funding, despite the law stating that remaining funds belong to the states.<\/p>\n
Republican concerns about BEAD and other broadband programs tend to focus less on technology and more on the use of federal funds. At the Small Business Committee hearing, Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., asked witnesses about the amount of money already spent on rural broadband programs and whether that has led to improvements in rural access. <\/p>\n
\u201cMany of my constituents lack . . . rural broadband, about 70,000 families. That\u2019s a lot,\u201d Alford said. \u201cAnd this is despite billions of dollars being spent on attempts to expand rural broadband including the most recent tranche of $42 billion from the Biden administration\u2019s Infrastructure and Jobs Act.\u201d<\/p>\n
Responding to Republican criticisms like Alford\u2019s, McClain Delaney said, \u201cinfrastructure takes time.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThere were many states that were just about to put shovels in the ground,\u201d she said of the BEAD program prior to the Trump administration changes.<\/p>\n
Future needs<\/p>\n
NTIA said on its website it \u201chas committed to completing its review of the final proposals within 90 days of submission,\u201d but deployment of service and evaluation of the BEAD program\u2019s success are still well in the future.<\/p>\n
The Democratic aide said \u201cthis is still going to be a once-in-a-generation effort,\u201d in their state, but other states may not be in the same position, especially if broadband costs remain too high to be accessible. They also said that certain technologies may not be able to meet bandwidth needs as data use expands with AI.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we\u2019re choosing the lowest cost technology, in some places that may not be focused in the future,\u201d they said. \u201cI think there will be communities that are left behind.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The federal program intended to bring broadband internet to rural areas is moving into a new phase as…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":229669,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[29658,8015,123986,64,7033,77,69,66,5495,25982,13959,17819,5173,712,82,357,564,3663,9540,1571,34056,405,35035,1269,153,5620,158,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-229668","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-internet","8":"tag-29658","9":"tag-american","10":"tag-brett-guthrie","11":"tag-business","12":"tag-democrats","13":"tag-donald-j-trump","14":"tag-donald-trump","15":"tag-elon-musk","16":"tag-energy","17":"tag-executive-branch","18":"tag-families","19":"tag-house","20":"tag-infrastructure","21":"tag-internet","22":"tag-joe-biden","23":"tag-kentucky","24":"tag-maryland","25":"tag-minnesota","26":"tag-missouri","27":"tag-national","28":"tag-national-telecommunications-and-information-administration","29":"tag-new-york","30":"tag-oped","31":"tag-opinion","32":"tag-policy","33":"tag-republicans","34":"tag-technology","35":"tag-united-states","36":"tag-unitedstates","37":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115210388969630213","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229668","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=229668"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229668\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/229669"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=229668"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=229668"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=229668"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}