The Bipartisan Broadband Bill is Good, But Won’t End the Digital Divide

The US Senate is on the cusp of approving an infrastructure package, which passed a critical first vote last night by 67-32. There is a lot to like in it, some of which will depend on decisions by the state governments and the Federal Communications Commission. Negotiations on the final bill are ongoing, but the draft broadband provisions have been released. Assuming that what was released makes it into the final bill, here is what to expect:

• Not enough money to close the digital divide in the US: Most estimates put the price tag of universal fiber at $80 to $100 billion, but this bipartisan package proposes only $40 billion in total for construction. It’s pretty obvious that this shortfall will prevent many areas from the funding they need to deliver fiber--or really any broadband access—to the millions of Americans in need of access.
• Protecting cable monopolies instead of giving us what we need: By defining internet access as the ability to get 100/20 Mbps service, the draft language allows cable monopolies to argue that anyone with access to ancient, insufficient internet access does not need federal money to build new infrastructure. This will lead to an absurd result: people on inferior, too-expensive cable services will be seen as equally served as their neighbors who will get federally funded fiber.
• Future-proofing criteria is essential to help avoid wasting these investments: The proposal establishes a priority (not a mandate) for future-proof infrastructure, which is essential to avoid the 100/20 Mbps speed from becoming standard. This provision helps avoid subsidies being provided for obsolete connections by legacy providers, by establishing federal priorities of the broadband projects being funded.
• Digital discrimination rules: The bill requires the FCC to establish what it means to have equal access to broadband and, more importantly, what a carrier would have to do to violate such a requirement. This provision carries major possibilities but is dependent on who the president nominates to run the FCC, as it will be their responsibility for setting the rules. If done right, it can set the stage for addressing digital redlining in certain urban communities, and push fiber on equitable terms.

[Ernesto Falcon is Senior Legislative Counsel at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.]