Bandwidth Hawk

It isn’t often that a vital federal program in the process of spending close to $50 billion gets ignored by mainstream media.

By: Steven S. Ross, Broadband Communities

The Trump White House seemed to be wasting little time back in early February when it sent Arielle Roth’s nomination to lead the NTIA to the Senate on February 3, and Olivia Trusty’s on February 11. Roth finally got her Senate committee hearing on March 27. Trusty, who has been nominated for a seat on the FCC, was cleared by various committees on April 29 and 30 but without committee reports. Neither had been scheduled for a conformation vote by the full Senate, as of May 26.

True, Roth gave birth to her sixth child early Wednesday morning April 9. My late wife and I had three children in quick succession 50 years ago, so I empathize. But Roth and her husband have vastly more resources than we ever had.

Roth could have received a recess appointment in mid-April and been confirmed by the full Senate when Congress returned, on April 28. As it is, much of the BEAD revision is well under way without her input. NTIA has a caretaker head now, and the head of NTIA’s BEAD office quit two months ago.

Lutnick gains free rein

As a result, the Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has had free rein to set aside years of work toward implementing the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program, and has declared the accompanying $2.75 billion Digital Equity Act as a dead letter.

The Digital Equity Act, originally approved in 2021 with bipartisan support, was to help close the digital divide by funding classes, distributing laptops and adding extra subsidies to promote broadband access for the poor, the elderly, the rural, and those struck by disasters such as Hurricane Helene. BEAD, as a whole, was to spend $42.45 billion to extend quality broadband service to almost all premises that lack it, in the name of helping rural businesses and providing resiliency against pandemics and natural disasters.

President Trump, perhaps confusing the Digital Equity Act with long-standing, Democrat-supported diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs throughout government and the corporate world, called the Digital Equity Act “racist.” For his part, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman Brendan Carr has concurred on both issues.

More delays on the horizon

The FCC and the Department of Commerce thus agree that the rules have to be changed. State broadband offices created under BEAD had almost completed their work. But the federal complaint is that the work should have been completed long ago, and (illogically) will be completed faster if the old rules are ripped up and new ones applied – no earlier than mid-July, as I was first to report.

The work would go faster, and would be of higher quality, if Roth and Trusty were confirmed now and had a say in it.

The problem for deployers and for communities that need better broadband is that there are laws, customs, court decisions and technical/financial needs covering these things. I can certainly agree that the Biden administration was stretching those laws and court rulings but pretending the laws don’t exist is just a recipe for endless lawsuits and endless delays.

DEI

DEI stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion. Organizations – typically LARGE organizations. including broadband deployers and government agencies, use DEI to run more smoothly and efficiently. But it is absolutely true that in many organizations, DEI programs have devolved into “language police” that give people ‘black marks’ for using the wrong language.

It is also true that the far left sees average incomes being higher for males and higher for Whites. The far-right notes that despite the averages there are far, far more poor Whites than there are poor Blacks. Neither side cares to work together to design equitable solutions. Right now, some of the largest deployers, including Verizon, have publicly renounced their DEI initiatives under FCC pressure.

True, the FCC under Jessica Rosenworcel went too far and sometimes disregarded basic economics. The courts have reversed one of her policies, on bulk billing, that I strongly disagreed with, for instance. To be fair, wording in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that created BEAD and the Digital Equity Act did order the FCC to ensure there wasn’t discrimination in the deployment of broadband based on identity – spawning rules on race, religious orientation, gender, and on and on.

The Digital Equity Act

The Digital Equity Act has three grant programs to help bridge the digital divide:

• State digital equity planning (funding for states to develop digital equity plans)
• State digital equity capacity-building (funds to states based on population, demographics, and broadband adoption to implement their digital equity plans)
• And a competitive grant program for efforts that aid digital equity creation

In other words, under the law, states are responsible for identifying needs, developing plans, and distributing funds to local partners for affordable internet, connected devices, and digital skills training.

As written, race is only a small, incidental part of the Digital Equity Act, which defines “covered populations” as people with a language barrier or those living households with incomes not exceeding 150 percent of the poverty threshold, veterans, people who live in rural areas, people with disabilities, people with low literacy, and yes, racial and ethnic minorities.

The bottom line

Thus, one can easily see that the Trump White House has a fair argument. How are deployers supposed to balance it all? Are there any so-called “legal safe harbors” that they can follow before courts rule? How do we balance the need to future-proof broadband networks (including wireless) with, for instance, heavy fiber use, against faster deployment with higher future subscription costs with, for instance, more satellite use?

Of course, the White House solution is to reduce current costs, no matter what the law or the laws of economics say. But the courts may have other ideas over time, ranging from total destruction of regulatory agencies to total refutation of White House policies. That adds to deployer risk, delays, and worse outcomes no matter how all this turns out.

Get content like this delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to the Broadband Communities newsletter.

Learn more about Broadband Communities Summit 2025 in Houston.