The federal program intended to bring broadband internet to rural areas is moving into a new phase as states propose how they plan to use billions in grant funds under a new set of guidelines issued by the Trump administration this summer.
Now that most states have submitted their final plans for grants from the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment, or BEAD, program, some Democrats are worried the grants will no longer be the broad fix for internet access they were intended to be when the program was created in the 2021 infrastructure law.
More changes could be coming. On Thursday the House Energy and Commerce’s subcommittee on Communications and Technology plans a hearing on a slate of 29 bills on broadband deployment and permitting. One would prohibit states from discriminating in broadband regulations based on what technology, such as fiber or satellite, is used to provide equivalent service and another would exempt repairs or replacement of communications facilities after a disaster from environmental reviews.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration said in early September that out of 56 eligible states and territories, 36 had submitted final draft BEAD proposals, while 20 have been granted “short-term extensions.”
The proposals are based on updated guidance NTIA issued in June to remove a variety of regulations put in place by the Biden administration for the $42.5 billion program, including a preference for fiber optic cable broadband.
Rep. April McClain Delaney, D-Md., who helped oversee the initial BEAD rollout while a deputy assistant secretary at NTIA, said she thinks the broadband projects under the new rules will not be as “scaleable or resilient as fiber.”
“The hard part is that in restructuring this very carefully rolled-out program, they’re rushing it, and I believe that they are actually going to result in having more expensive service for our rural and underserved communities,” McClain Delaney said.
House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., said he was frustrated by the pace of the original program, but glad the delay gave the Trump administration a chance to rework the grants.
“They passed the BEAD program and spent four years without spending any money,” he said, going on to add that “There was nothing built with the BEAD money.”
At a House Small Business Committee hearing on Sept. 3, the panel’s Chair Roger Williams, R-Texas, praised the Trump administration’s revamp of the eligibility criteria, which covered labor, climate change, and net neutrality factors.
“Broadband deployment must be free from political interference,” he said. “That is why I am encouraged by the steps taken by the Trump administration to reduce red tape, lower costs, and accelerate broadband deployment, ultimately improving connective opportunities.”
The shift away from fiber-preference, in which NTIA asked states to prioritize the lowest cost options for providing broadband to rural areas, opened more BEAD grants to satellite and fixed-point wireless internet. That move has raised attention about the role Starlink, the satellite internet service owned by billionaire Elon Musk, might play under the new rules.
The committee’s ranking member, Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez, D-N.Y., called fiber “the best technology around” and satellite technology “untested.”
“I am concerned that the administration is missing the realities of satellites, namely that it cannot effectively match the speed, reliability, and capacity offered by fiber,” she said, adding that “it seems like this change will make BEAD focus more on cheap work than on good work.”
Williams, in his questioning, tried to guide witnesses towards support for the new rule, asking Kristi Westbrock, CEO and General Manager of Consolidated Telephone Company in Minnesota, “how important is it for federal broadband programs to take a technology-neutral approach such as allowing fiber, wireless satellite, and other solutions to compete based on what best fits each community’s needs?”
Westbrock said “we believe that there’s room for all technologies,” but added “in my professional opinion, fiber broadband is the answer.”
“I also want to make sure that in the BEAD program that the dollars are spent . . . well and that we’re not back asking for additional dollars because one of the technologies didn’t stand up for the long haul,” she said.
The satellite broadband industry is led by Starlink, a division of Musk’s company SpaceX. Amazon’s Project Kuiper service, which is not yet commercially available, has also been selected for BEAD contracts in some state proposals.
McClain Delaney criticized what she said looked like a political reward for companies whose leaders are allied with President Donald Trump.
“Don’t preference private contractors that are friends over companies that will best serve the community,” she said.
Fiber vs. satellite and wireless
Supporters of fiber internet worry that the preference for low-cost bids will keep fast, reliable internet out of reach for rural customers and require more congressional action down the road.
Satellite and fixed-point wireless have lower upfront costs, making it easier for those internet service providers to bid less than fiber providers, who have to put cables in the ground to reach homes and businesses in rural areas. But the higher initial cost of fiber, supporters say, pays for a long-term promise of service.
“Once you build it, you leave it in the ground, it will remain useful for 30, 50 years, generations,” according to Drew Garner, director of policy engagement at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, a foundation focused on promoting inclusive broadband policy.
But, Garner said, satellite and wireless internet need “ongoing maintenance and updates to meet user needs,” which can mean greater costs to subscribers.
Guthrie argued satellite will be helpful in getting internet to rural users sooner rather than later.
“Would you rather have fiber to your home a decade from now, or access to internet . . . within this year?” Guthrie said. “And I think that’s what the tradeoff is.”
Other uses for BEAD funds
Last month, McClain Delaney and nine other Democratic House members sent a letter to NTIA emphasizing the importance of allowing states to use BEAD funding for nondeployment purposes as originally intended, including broadband mapping and adoption programs. The letter asked NTIA to clarify whether and how states can use BEAD funds for these adjacent activities.
“Broadband deployment is critical; however, its long-term success requires parallel investments in the foundational nondeployment activities that enable effective implementation and adoption,” the letter said.
Last month NTIA indicated, without giving a timeline, that it plans to issue submission instructions for nondeployment projects. However, it also claimed earlier this month in an announcement that under its new rules, “states are already projecting savings of at least $13 billion for American taxpayers.”
A Democratic Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity said their state’s proposal shifted how much of its allocation will go towards deploying broadband internet to users, from 100 percent to about half. The aide said some states are concerned the Trump administration could try to take back the funding, despite the law stating that remaining funds belong to the states.
Republican concerns about BEAD and other broadband programs tend to focus less on technology and more on the use of federal funds. At the Small Business Committee hearing, Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., asked witnesses about the amount of money already spent on rural broadband programs and whether that has led to improvements in rural access.
“Many of my constituents lack . . . rural broadband, about 70,000 families. That’s a lot,” Alford said. “And this is despite billions of dollars being spent on attempts to expand rural broadband including the most recent tranche of $42 billion from the Biden administration’s Infrastructure and Jobs Act.”
Responding to Republican criticisms like Alford’s, McClain Delaney said, “infrastructure takes time.”
“There were many states that were just about to put shovels in the ground,” she said of the BEAD program prior to the Trump administration changes.
Future needs
NTIA said on its website it “has committed to completing its review of the final proposals within 90 days of submission,” but deployment of service and evaluation of the BEAD program’s success are still well in the future.
The Democratic aide said “this is still going to be a once-in-a-generation effort,” in their state, but other states may not be in the same position, especially if broadband costs remain too high to be accessible. They also said that certain technologies may not be able to meet bandwidth needs as data use expands with AI.
“If we’re choosing the lowest cost technology, in some places that may not be focused in the future,” they said. “I think there will be communities that are left behind.”
The post Cost, service questions loom over revamped broadband push appeared first on Roll Call.
