What is the economic benefit of the Affordable Connectivity Program to the health care system? In short, there are many ways that telehealth can reduce costs and improve outcomes. This is not really a debatable point.  As a recent witness testified at a House hearing on telehealth, there is now substantial research demonstrating improved outcomes and access across numerous specialties and a vast array of healthcare services published in recent years. What I hope we could all agree on is that it would be helpful in the context of not just the ACP debate—but also for the future of Medicare, Medicaid, and the Veterans Administration—for the Administration and/or Congress to seek an authoritative study on the issue.  I think it should be framed in terms of what COVID has taught us about the future of healthcare delivery.  That episode accelerated the movement to online healthcare, and it would serve many public policy purposes to have such a study. In doing that study, we should incorporate the wisdom of Wayne Gretzky, who famously said that the key is to skate to where the puck is going.  So here, there is a movement by multiple stakeholders to use telehealth generally to improve outcomes and lower costs. We should not only understand that movement, but we should restructure our government’s healthcare insurance policies (Medicare, Medicaid, and medical services provided by the Veterans’ Administration) to take advantage of the opportunities created by modern communications technology.  After all, as discussed in my testimony, broadband is a general-purpose technology that produces productivity gains throughout different sectors of the economy.  The cost of providing it to those who cannot currently afford it is relatively small compared to the economic gains that such access would provide, in healthcare and other areas. In short, given the amount the United States spends on Medicare and Medicaid, universal, sustainable broadband should be seen as a huge opportunity to improve health outcomes while lowering costs.  We should seize that opportunity.

[Blair Levin is the Policy Advisor to New Street Research and a nonresident senior fellow at Brookings Metro​.]

As of June 1, the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is officially exhausted. This means that the 23 million households that rely on it can no longer receive a $30 per month discount on fixed or mobile broadband service. Without the ACP, customers’ main option is the antiquated Lifeline program, which offers $9.25 per month toward broadband service. Though it has existed for decades, Lifeline is significantly smaller and far more limited in scope than the ACP. Congress alone can remedy this problem with a comprehensive solution to broadband affordability. Thankfully, they have already done the work to create a free-market, light-touch program that gives customers flexibility to choose broadband services that meet their needs. While the best time to find a long-term solution for the ACP was months ago, the second-best time is now. Congress must come together and bring votes to the floor to ensure this important program can continue in a revenue-neutral way and give themselves a runway for meaningful USF reform to provide a long-term solution to broadband affordability.

The Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether Microsoft structured one of its latest deals with an artificial-intelligence startup to avoid a government antitrust review of the transaction. Microsoft in March hired Inflection AI’s co-founder and almost all of its employees and agreed to pay the startup around $650 million as part of a licensing fee to resell its technology. Inflection’s investors were told they would be repaid over time by the sales proceeds. Companies are required to report acquisitions valued at more than $119 million to federal antitrust-enforcement agencies, which have the option to investigate a deal’s impact on competition. The FTC or the Justice Department, which share antitrust authority, can sue to block mergers or other investments if an investigation finds the deal would substantially reduce competition or lead to a monopoly. FTC Chair Lina Khan has expressed concern that tech behemoths could eventually acquire or control the most promising AI applications, giving them a tight grip on systems that have humanlike abilities to converse, create art and write computer code. The FTC is now drilling down on Microsoft’s deal with Inflection, seeking information about how and why they negotiated their partnership.

Two incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) in Virginia—Amelia Telephone Corporation and New Castle Telephone Company—will be the property of RiverStreet Management Services LLC under an agreement signed on May 31 with TDS Telecom, current owner of the ILECs. The deal is based on a stock purchase agreement with RiverStreet. Other financial details about the transaction, which is expected to close during the third quarter of the year, were not revealed. If the deal sounds familiar, it is: In 2015, TDS Telecom sold about 3,000 lines in three North Carolina communities to Wilkes Communications. This is the third divestiture TDS has announced in just recently as it seeks to focus on its core fiber broadband business and stockpile cash for fiber network investment.