Already-lagging broadband program faces more uncertainty under Trump

Sharing is caring!

Even as Trump administration activities raise more questions about the funding and regulations of a huge federal program aimed at bringing broadband to disadvantaged communities across the nation, state broadband authorities and experts warn the initiative is running behind time.

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, or BEAD, is currently in its third year and is primarily still in the planning stage.

David Griffith, the vice chair of the Alpine County, California, Board of Supervisors, stated that he has yet to see how the BEAD funds will benefit his community. Most of the approximately 1,100 people who live in the county can’t afford high-speed connections and rely on phone lines to access the internet.

For instance, he stated that many county residents drive 30 miles to the nearest department of motor vehicles site rather than renewing their driver’s licenses online. Their internet speed is insufficient for banking, tax filing, and telemedicine.

Griffith stated, “We all want government to function, and the BEAD program is an example where the need and the funding are there, but it’s just a very inefficient process.”

As part of the $42.45 billion BEAD program established under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, Congress gave California $1.8 billion to guarantee that households have access to high-speed internet.

The first proposals from each of the 50 states have been accepted, releasing a percentage of the funds that the federal government will supply, frequently 20%. The only states that have turned in their final plans are Nevada, Delaware, and Louisiana.

The effectiveness of the initiative is being questioned by a few local professionals and officials. They claim that a drawn-out challenge process to the federal mapping of the areas most in need of broadband and insufficient mapping are contributing factors to the poor pace of progress. Additionally, some experts are concerned that states are prioritizing infrastructure that is too costly.

OUR WORK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY YOU.

Broadband authorities at the federal and state levels are also awaiting the impact of President Donald Trump’s budget freeze on the BEAD program, as well as any potential changes to the program’s affordability requirements or preferred technology.

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, who took office on February 19, avoided questions asking him to commit to distributing funds to states at his confirmation hearing, stating that he supported the objectives of BEAD but wanted to ensure that it was carried out successfully and efficiently.

Griffith expressed optimism that the funding will continue to flow, pointing out that the majority of BEAD’s funding will go to rural communities, many of which have a propensity to elect and support Republicans.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) approved Louisiana’s original and final BEAD plans, making it the first state to do so.

The state intends to use its GUMBO 2.0 program to allocate over $1.35 billion in funds. Internet service providers, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and other organizations receive federal funding from the states to expand their infrastructure.

Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry wrote to the Commerce Department shortly after the state’s plans were approved in January, requesting changes to NTIA and the BEAD program. Among other things, he asked that the agency’s requirements be streamlined and that funding reviews be made more transparent and timely.

Stateline’s inquiries concerning the BEAD program were not answered by NTIA.

Some states’ officials have had difficulties with the National Broadband Map published by the Federal Communications Commission.

Local governments, ISPs, nonprofit organizations, and others can assist in determining whether a specific location genuinely has internet connectivity by using the mapchallenge method.

According to Griffith, the county supervisor for California, there were numerous mistakes on the initial map in his region.

According to him, when we walked through Alpine County, roughly 7-8% of homes and businesses were not included on the National Broadband Map. You cannot connect your house or place of business with that money unless you are listed on the National Broadband Map.

Some regions seek to make up the difference as millions lose government assistance for internet costs.

The BEAD program also has an affordabilityrequirementthat mandates state broadband officials include a low-cost service option for low-income households. However, industry associations have resisted, claiming that the law is wholly disconnected from the financial reality of setting up and running networks in the most expensive and difficult-to-reach locations.

According to Sachin Gupta, vice president of business and technology initiatives at Centranet, a division of the Central Rural Electric Cooperative in Oklahoma, the BEAD program has progressed a bit more slowly than it ought to have. Households located just outside of Oklahoma City are served by the organization.

According to him, certain people are unable to participate in the digital economy, work remotely, learn remotely, or practice telemedicine and telehealth. There are therefore real-world repercussions.

Oklahoma was able to request access to more than $797 million after the federal government accepted its initial BEAD plan in August.

According to Gupta, the objective is to link families to the internet as soon as possible, although there will be certain obstacles, including mapping.

According to Gupta, this effort has been ongoing for a while, but if the money is taken back, they would be even more upset than they were previously.

The BEAD initiative has been criticized by experts at the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank focused on science and technology policy, for favoring excessively costly broadband infrastructure.

Although BEAD favors fiber-optic internet because it is quicker and more dependable than other connection options, the group also believes that alternative technologies, like satellites, may be more affordable. Instead, the funds saved by employing less expensive infrastructure should be used to promote affordability.

That might be the best-kept secret: According to Joe Kane, the foundation’s director of broadband and spectrum policy, the lack of internet is not the reason why people aren’t online anymore. It’s because they are unable to pay for it.

Native countries that have limited access to the internet are constructing their own broadband networks.

There won’t be much money left over for affordability initiatives in areas like Nevada, where officials estimate that installing fiber will cost roughly $77,000 per company or residential location, according to Kane. Now that the Affordable Connectivity Program, a pandemic-era discount program for low-income households, has ended, it is even more important.

The most crucial thing, in my opinion, for broadband in general is that we try to use data to determine the true reasons of the digital divide and how well our broadband strategy satisfies them, Kane stated. Because we are currently completely out of sync.

However, Gupta, who has spent years working on Oklahoma’s broadband expansion, claimed that fiber can offer faster internet than other forms of broadband.

We are only kicking that can down the road for another five years if we implement technologies that are not scalable.

Derrick Owens, senior vice president of government and industry affairs of WTA Advocates for Rural Broadband, stated that internet affordability is a major problem as consumer costs climb. Across the nation, the association represents small, rural telecom companies.

Some states have attempted to increase broadband availability by enacting new legislation in addition to federal broadband schemes. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures’ broadband legislation database, as of February 24, legislators in 43 states had submitted 300 measures addressing broadband access, infrastructure, affordability, and other topics.

Three of the states—New York, Minnesota, and Connecticut—aspire to enhance the process of identifying which regions require improved internet connectivity.

Legislators have introduced bills this year to increase internet connection in rural areas in ten states: Connecticut, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Virginia.

According to Owens, you cannot fully engage in the modern economy if you do not have constant, full-time access to broadband. And it’s the global economy, not just the local one. Therefore, efforts are being made to ensure that individuals get broadband that is high-speed, dependable, and of excellent quality—ideally, this is what BEAD offers.

GET THE HEADLINES FOR THE MORNING.