Although President Biden has just signed the American Rescue Plan Act (including $7 billion in E-rate funding) into law, some believe that the March 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act already took care of the connectivity gap. How did states use CARES Act funding to improve broadband for unserved and underserved Americans? In short, approximately $3.28 billion from the CARES Act went toward this goal, funneled through three different sources: 

• General COVID-19 relief funding was allocated to states and Tribes, each of which could use the amount for broadband at their discretion.
• States could apply for emergency education funds, managed by the Department of Education. Many states used some of this funding for broadband.
• Existing programs, including the Federal Communications Commission’s COVID-19 Telehealth program and the ReConnect program within the Department of Agriculture (USDA), also got a funding boost from the CARES Act.

43 states used some CARES Act funding for broadband, in addition to the two federal programs administered by the FCC and USDA. For the purposes of this analysis, we’ve categorized the funding into five broadband-related buckets: Digital learning, infrastructure, telehealth, libraries, and other broadband spending. The biggest revelation: Over half of the spending focused on digital learning for K-12 students, while a third was spent on broadband infrastructure. All in all, it seems that officials placed a higher priority on immediate impact activity – digital learning – instead of focusing on long-term broadband deployment to address the digital divide. 

Colorado and federal lawmakers want to put big money into more efforts to expand high-speed internet access. In Colorado, about 90,000 rural residents and 65,000 students across the state do not have access or adequate access, according to a recent Colorado Broadband Office report. A state-level stimulus measure unveiled this week proposes spending $50 million to $75 million to extend broadband to more parts of the state — the third-largest item in the package. The money would essentially double what the state spends on the initiative now and help replace diminishing revenue from a 2018 law that fell well short of its goal.

Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr detailed his plan to extend US leadership in 5G at an event hosted by the American Enterprise Institute.  Highlights of Commissioner Carr’s plan:

• On the spectrum front in 2021:
  • Auction 100 MHz of spectrum in the 3.45 GHz band at 5G power levels
  • Auction the 100+ MHz of spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band
  • Adopt an order that permits very low power devices to operate in the 6 GHz band
  • Seek comment on increasing the power levels for CBRS operations in the 3.5 GHz band
• And for 2022 and beyond:
  • Auction the 50 MHz of spectrum between 1300-1350 MHz in 2022
  • Auction another millimeter wave band in 2022, with the 42 GHz as a prime candidate
  • Auction spectrum in the lower 3 GHz, 4.8 GHz, and 7 GHz bands after 2022
• On infrastructure and policy:
  • Produce targeted broadband maps by Fall 2021, not 2022
  • Start the 5G Fund auction early next year to support rural builds
  • Create a Federal Lands Desk at the FCC to address permitting delays on federal lands
  • Act on pending infrastructure reforms to drive down the costs of reaching rural areas
  • Expand the tower crews needed to complete 5G builds through Commissioner Carr’s 5G jobs initiative
  • Reject heavy-handed policies that would turn back the clock on the progress we’ve made

Schools were working well before the pandemic to address the challenges presented by the digital divide, which disproportionately affects Black, Latino, and Native American students and those in low-income households. The shift to distance learning dramatically raised the stakes. Schools had to take a lead because the federal government has failed to make internet available and affordable, said Blair Levin, an Obama-era Federal Communications Commission official.“The schools were so stressed,” Levin said. “It was not easy. It was a big burden.”

States have also played a large role in connecting students, funneling money to schools or organizing purchases themselves. Connecticut paid for hot spots and devices. Alabama gave families vouchers for internet service. North Dakota identified students without internet access. Each approach had its drawbacks. Hot spots don't work well in homes with multiple students or if cellphone reception is bad. Some school officials and families criticized the cable and wireless companies' low-cost internet as still too expensive over the long term, or inadequate. Creating networks takes time, funds and expertise, and sometimes they were not ready to go in an emergency.