Joseph Wender, director of the Capital Projects Fund (CPF), said that the program has awarded all the states and territories their portion of the $10 billion fund, and the awardees have decided to spend $8 billion on broadband infrastructure projects. The CPF was created as part of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), which became law in March 2021. ARPA included a variety of programs to help Americans during and after the Covid crisis. The $10 billion Capital Projects Fund gave states funding for critical projects to enable work, education and healthcare in response to the public health crisis. Providing an update on the Capital Projects program, Wender said, “States have chosen to use $8 billion of the $10 billion for broadband. They report to us that when it’s done in 2026, over 2 million locations that previously did not enjoy high-speed broadband will have it as a result of our funds.”

Fixed and mobile broadband Internet access service providers (BIAS providers) have responded to increasing demand for more data by offering higher bandwidth plans. Many of these BIAS
providers, however, have imposed limits on data usage, or data caps, that, when exceeded, may result in higher fees and slower speeds for subscribers. With this Notice of Inquiry, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) explores the use of data caps  for fixed and mobile broadband Internet service, and their corresponding impact on consumers and competition. In light of the critical importance of broadband Internet access service, we seek comment to better understand the current state of data caps and whether data caps cause harm to competition or consumers’ ability to access broadband Internet services.

When it comes to connectivity, Connecticut (pun intended) is in the enviable situation of having 99 percent of its locations already powered by broadband. But statewide usage statistics—from the American Community Survey and providers’ adoption data—showed that only about 87 percent of its locations actually subscribe to internet. That roughly 12 percent gap means the state has other priorities for broadband funding than many less-well-connected states. Connecticut’s Director of Telecommunications and Broadband Kevin Pisacich describes a statewide, holistic approach to broadband, in which every agency works together to push three priorities forward at once: action, adoption, and affordability. 

 The U.S is at a critical juncture for regaining leadership in driving future international spectrum allocation decisions.  The U.S is in serious risk of marooning itself and becoming a mid-band spectrum and technology island, given U.S. allocations in the 3 and 6 GHz bands that increasingly diverge from the harmonization in the rest of the world.  To stave off such an outcome, the U.S. must drive consensus with global industry ecosystem partners and government allies to ensure that emerging technologies and services, such as supplemental coverage from space services, or “direct-to-cell,” do not cause or suffer from harmful interference internationally.  Global consensus will also ensure that other nascent and future technologies are deployed in a harmonized manner that preserves economic scale and synergies—to the benefit of industry and consumers in all countries. The first and biggest imperative we have is reauthorizing the FCC’s auction authority.  I implore Congress to take action soon. And to preach to the choir a bit, I also agree with two of CTIA’s key policy assessments in the FCC’s spectrum implementation plan proceeding involving a unique opportunity for the U.S. to focus on the 7 and 8 GHz bands for 5G.