Rural Digital Opportunity Fund

On Jan 29, 2020, Reps Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Jerry McNerney (D-CA), Doris Matsui (D-CA), and Tony Cárdenas (D-CA) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai expressing concern that the FCC was moving forward on its Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) in a haphazard manner without consluting states that share the goal of effectively serving residents with broadband.

On April 9, Reps David Trone (D-MD), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), John Sarbanes (D-MD), Andy Harris (R-MD), Anthony Brown (D-MD, and James Raskin (D-MD) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai about the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF), particularly calling to revise eligibility for the program so that states with existing investments to build out their capacity are not disqualified from receiving RDOF funding.

MoffettNathanson researchers say funding through the upcoming Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) auction and other government programs could play a key role in fueling rural cable broadband footprint growth. To date, cable footprint growth has been minimal, according to the researchers, who note that Comcast’s footprint has grown at an average rate of 1.1% annually since 2016 and that Charter’s has grown an average of .7% per year over the same period.

On Feb 14, 2020, various Members of Congress wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai expressing concern that the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Order may inadvertently undermine the ability of states to help close the digital divide due to the rushed process undertaken by the FCC's adoption of the Order.

By this Public Notice, the Federal Communications Commission announces the status of the 505 short-form applications received for Auction 904. Bidding in Auction 904 will begin on Thursday, Oct 29, 2020, and will award up to $16 billion over 10 years to service providers that commit to offer voice and broadband services to fixed locations in unserved high-cost census blocks. This Public Notice also provides important information regarding modification and resubmission of short-form applications and reminds applicants of certain procedures the FCC adopted for this auction.

The US is set to get another satellite broadband provider that uses a non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) approach. The Federal Communications Commission has approved market access to OneWeb, a NGSO satellite broadband operator that filed for bankruptcy earlier in 2020 but is back in action after receiving an investment from the British government. NGSO operators use constellations of satellites that orbit the earth at lower altitudes in comparison with traditional geostationary satellites.

In the midst of the COVID-19 crisis, the General Assembly is considering Gov. Northam’s request to increase funding to bring better broadband to all Virginians. Such support is important, as students stay home and learn, adults stay home and work, and seniors stay home even as they visit their doctor. Funding for broadband would be an important step — and a wake-up call to the federal government. Virginia’s broadband challenges are multifaceted. In rural areas, nearly a third of households have no access to broadband.

A growing number of government programs support broadband deployment. Some programs allow service providers to combine, or “stack,” subsidies in a project’s funding; others have prohibitions against stacking subsidies built into the program rules. Recently this has come up in the debate on the Federal Communications Commission’s new Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF). This is the question: Should stacking be allowed, or should it be discouraged? Just how does a provider stack subsidies?

The coronavirus pandemic has revealed many hard truths, and one of them is our nation’s digital divide. In Illinois, the Office of Broadband, through its Connect Illinois broadband program, is working to ensure broadband use by everyone in the state.

I work with communities all of the time that want to know if they are unserved or underserved by broadband. I've started to tell them to toss away those two terms, which is not a good way to think about broadband today. The main reason to scrap these terms is that they convey the idea that 25/3 Mbps broadband ought to be an acceptable target speed for building new broadband. Urban America has moved far beyond the kinds of broadband speeds that are being discussed as acceptable for rural broadband. Cable companies now have minimum speeds that vary between 100 Mbps and 200 Mbps.