At Nominations Hearing, Sen. Cruz Calls Out Fraud-Risk in Affordable Connectivity Program

The [Federal Communications Commission] exercises tremendous power not only over the media, but also over consumers’ pocketbooks. Through the Universal Service Fund (USF) the agency has imposed burdensome taxes on American consumers to fund inefficient, ever-expanding programs. Nominees must be good stewards of funding and stand up for taxpayers’ interests. Despite being repeatedly excoriated by the [Government Accountability Office] and economists for failing to track where USF money was going, the current FCC leadership failed to learn from past mistakes in setting up the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP).  According to the FCC’s own Inspector General, the FCC “did not apply lessons learned” and “failed to implement several important recommendations intended to enhance and safeguard the integrity of the [subsidies].” Proponents for Title II have refused to take accountability for the parade of horribles they manufactured in the lead-up to the Restoring Internet Freedom Order. Rather than articulating meaningful reasons for another policy reversal, they claim they simply want regulatory oversight—in other words, the power to micromanage providers’ pricing and terms of service, and collect billions in new USF taxes—all at the expense of investment, innovation, and consumer choice. Let’s call a spade a spade: any effort to outlaw usage-based pricing is straight-up rate regulation. Worse, bullying providers to ban usage-based pricing would force them to raise prices across the board, making broadband more expensive for all American households.