Federal and state governments have earmarked billions of dollars to build out fast internet service, but most plans don't address one of the biggest reasons people don't have broadband at home: They can't afford to pay for service. If the early days of the Emergency Broadband Benefit program are any indication, there is big demand for a more substantial subsidy. In the first week of the program, more than 1 million households signed up. Some civil rights and consumer groups are joining with the broadband industry to push Congress to make the broadband subsidy permanent. Groups such as the National Urban League, American Association of People with Disabilities, the National Black Caucus of State Legislators are teaming up with broadband companies like AT&T, Comcast, Charter and Verizon in a coalition they're calling Broadband Equity for All to ask Congress to create a "predictable, dependable, long-term broadband benefit program." But Benton Senior Fellow and Public Advocate Gigi Sohn warned that policymakers should proceed with caution when it comes to making something like an EBB subsidy permanent. "I agree a permanent subsidy is needed," she said. "But it can't unjustly enrich companies or incentivize them to keep their prices high." She also agrees that Congress needs to find a sustainable way to fund the subsidy. "We can't require advocates for low-income individuals to come hat in hand to Congress every year for appropriations," she added.

As governments push for universal adoption of broadband Internet service, policies must address the fact that many households with access to the service do not to subscribe to it. Lower adoption rates in some minority communities are one cause for concern. A confounding factor with respect to race is that it is often correlated with income, education, and other factors that drive Internet adoption in the home. Do these differences in socio-economic resources fully explain the difference in adoption rates? I decompose the effects of socio-economic factors on broadband adoption distinct from the effects of race. My analysis finds that differences in socio-economic resources like income and education do relatively little to explain the differences in adoption among racial groups. The demand for broadband appears to be influenced by unobserved factors correlated with race. It appears, therefore, that addressing the lack of adoption of the Internet at home may require remedial measures targeting specific minority groups rather than uniform policies that address socio-economic resources like income.

The promise of fifth-generation wireless networks has drawn headlines for at least three years, but 5G that lives up to the hype has yet to arrive for most Americans. All of the major US wireless carriers say they have nationwide 5G service, but industry analysts say that service is largely indistinguishable from 4G LTE service. The first carrier isn’t expected to reach two-thirds of the country with significantly higher-speed 5G until 30 months after the first 5G-capable phones made their debut in mid-2019, compared with about 18 months for 4G following the launch of the first 4G-capable phones in fall 2010.

A combination of factors play into the relatively slow rollout of 5G. Some of the problems involve network infrastructure: The availability of space in the portion of the airwaves that strikes a balance between fast transmission speeds and long signal ranges is limited. 5G also requires deployment of new network equipment, a sometimes cumbersome process. And much of the new equipment isn’t manufactured in the US, meaning purchases can take longer than buying domestic. Industry observers also cite the lack of killer apps to spur demand and drive adoption the way mobile video did for 4G. And while telecom companies have recently started allocating billions of dollars in capital expenditures for 5G, they likely won’t speed up build-out efforts until there’s clarity around future 5G-related revenues, says John Roese, chief technology officer at Dell Technologies Inc. and a former executive with companies including Huawei Technologies Co. and Nortel Networks Inc. “They got burned once before,”Roese says, referring to telecom carriers’ disappointing returns on their investments in 4G networks, which he says mostly benefited technology companies that offered apps and other services over those networks. “So they’re very cautious about it.”