Healthcare Facilities

Two very real Universal Service Fund (USF) problems need to be addressed: funding and spending. The way the program is funded is inefficient, unsustainable, and regressive. Regardless of the judicial outcome, the tax that the court declared unconstitutional is both inefficient, by taxing a small, price-sensitive, declining base, and regressive, with a higher proportional burden falling on those least able to afford it. The program spends too much money on the wrong things. The High Cost Fund in particular, which accounts for about half of total spending, is outdated and wasteful.

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau seeks nominations for the following Board member positions on the Board of Directors of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) listed below for a three-year term. In addition to the six positions that are expiring as a matter of course at the end of 2024, the FCC also seeks nominations for two additional vacancies resulting from a resignation and carryover vacancy of USAC Board members. All nominations must be filed with the Office of the Secretary by October 28, 2024.

In May 2023, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), the minority leader of the Senate Commerce Committee, sent a letter to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting an examination of how the Federal Communications Commission administers the Universal Service Fund (USF). The USF consists of money collected from telecommunications companies that is dedicated to fulfilling the goals of universal service.

The Universal Service Fund is a $8 billion decades-old mechanism created by Congress in 1996 to support vital communications investments where the marketplace falls short: connecting schools and libraries to high-speed internet; helping rural hospitals adopt telemedicine; ensuring low-income households have basic communications services; and investing in broadband in communities that need it most. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the current administration of the Universal Service Fund is unconstitutional. Why is the Universal Service Fund so important?

How much power may Congress hand off to the Washington bureaucracy? That’s a live question, so grab the popcorn to read a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. In a 9-7 en banc ruling, it invalidated a “universal service” surcharge added to cellphone bills.

On July 24, 2024, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration published the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the Competitive Grant Program. The Competitive Grant Program is the third (and final) set of funds available from the

An appeals court ruled the current structure of the Universal Service Fund is unconstitutional. This decision puts at risk the high-speed connectivity of millions of rural and low-income Americans and the future trajectory of U.S. economic growth and global competitiveness. Now it’s Congress’s duty to promptly and decisively make clear the nation’s unwavering commitment to affordable, universal connectivity. The court’s fundamentally flawed decision hands Congress an enormously important opportunity to seize the initiative and ensure our nation’s abiding commitment to universal service.

In a ruling that quickly caused shock waves in the U.S. telecommunications industry, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, 9-7, that the Universal Service Fund (USF) is unconstitutional as currently administered. The Court explained its ruling by saying that the USF is a “misbegotten tax” that violates Article I, § 1 of the Constitution, which states that all legislative powers are given to Congress, which is made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

After the Fifth Circuit ruled, 9-7, that the Universal Service Fund is unconstitutional as currently administered, we've seen the following responses.

More than 70,000 Kansas households lack broadband access and over 35,000 additional households’ existing service options render them “underserved.” In addition, many of Kansas’ 8,500 community anchor institutions (CAIs) lack gigabit-level broadband service that would better allow them to provide full levels of support to their communities.