Connect with us

Recovery Act

House Appropriations Committee Seeks $6 Billion for Broadband, Would Impose Speed Requirements Upon Most Grant Recipients

WASHINGTON, January 16, 2009 – The House Appropriations Committee on Thursday released draft legislation providing an additional $6 billion to expand broadband access, both in rural areas and in areas that are generally “underserved” by broadband providers.



Editor’s Note: Visit’s Broadband Wiki for a catalogue of the various broadband-related stimulus proposals, at

WASHINGTON, January 16, 2009 – The House Appropriations Committee on Thursday released draft legislation (PDF) that would provide $6 billion to expand broadband access, both in rural areas and in areas that are generally “underserved” by broadband providers.

The draft legislation would split the $6 billion into two pools of $2.85 billion, with one administered by the Rural Utility Service of the Agriculture Department, and the other by the National Telecommunications and Information Agency of the Commerce Department.

An additional $350 million would be allocated to NTIA’s budget to fund the administration of broadband-related activities, according to the draft.

Several non-profit advocacy organizations expressed satisfaction that the broadband stimulus measures do not appear designed to primarily provide financial benefits for incumbent telecommunications providers.

“We urge that these dollars be tied to clear public service principles and concrete administrative accountability,” said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, in a Thursday letter to David Obey, D-Wis., Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “Broadband as economic recovery should be ‘build-out,’ not ‘bail-out.’”

In the debate over broadband stimulus, one emerging dividing line separating industry-focused groups from other broadband advocates is the former’s emphasis on tax credits as a means to immediately effectuate broadband-related investments.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, for example, had urged that a proposed $10 billion investment in broadband-related activities be split evenly between tax credits and broadband grants.

Other industry-focused groups have also urged the tax credit approach.

Free Press, by contrast, proposed that $30 billion of its $38 billion in stimulating broadband supply be channeled through grants. EDUCAUSE and other groups have also focused on grant programs so that municipalities and non-profit entities can take advantage of such investments.

Additionally, the draft legislation appears to favor high-speed variants of broadband. The Federal Communications Commission currently defines “broadband” as communications at speeds of 768 kilobits per second (Kbps) or greater. In June, the FCC raised that threshold from 200 Kbps.

As a practical matter, most of the major wire-based broadband-related services offer actual download speeds in the 2 Mpbs to 6 Mpbs range.

For example, tests conducted by users of show that home users of fiber-optic services enjoyed an average download speed of 6.48 Mbps, that cable modem users experienced an average download speed of 4.44 Mbps, and that digital subscriber line (DSL) service averaged 1.7 Mbps.

Among all takers of the Broadband Census and speed test, the average download speed for home internet users was 3.58 Mbps (average upload speed was 1.0 Mbps). The median download speed among home internet users was 2.19 Mbps (median upload speed was 643 Kbps).

But the draft stimulus bill of the House Appropriations Committee seeks to spur investment in broadband of a far higher caliber.

Of the $2.85 billion portion to be administered by NTIA, for example, $1.85 billion would go to wireline-based broadband, and $1 billion would to wireless services.

For the $1.85 billion in wireline-based broadband, the NTIA would award grants “to the extent possible” such that 75 percent of funds would go to eligible entities providing broadband of at least 45 Mpbs for downloads and 15 Mbps for uploads, to areas that are “underserved.”

The remaining 25 percent of that pool would go to providers offering “basic broadband service” – which the legislation defines as 5 Mpbs for downloads and 1 Mpbs for uploads – to areas currently “unserved” by existing broadband providers.

Both terms – “underserved” and “unserved” –  are left to be defined by the FCC, within 45 days of the act’s passage.

However, the draft bill does require that NTIA’s stimulus-related funds go to either “unserved” or “underserved” areas, and that no more than 20 percent of a state’s population or geography may fall into such areas.

The $1 billion pool for wireless broadband would be similarly bisected: 75 percent going to providers of “advanced wireless broadband service” – defined as 3 Mbps for downloads and 1 Mbps for uploads – in underserved areas.

The remaining 25 percent would go to entities providing wireless voice services in unserved areas.

About is a free information and news service providing information about local broadband speeds, prices, availability, reliability and competition. Take the Broadband Census at is a participant in the National Broadband Strategy ‘Call to Action’ being shepherded by James Baller, of Baller Herbst Law Group. Drew Clark, Editor and Executive Director of, is co-chair of the “Metrics Working Group,” together with ITIF President Robert Atkinson.

Drew Clark is the Editor and Publisher of and a nationally-respected telecommunications attorney at The CommLaw Group. He has closely tracked the trends in and mechanics of digital infrastructure for 20 years, and has helped fiber-based and fixed wireless providers navigate coverage, identify markets, broker infrastructure, and operate in the public right of way. The articles and posts on Broadband Breakfast and affiliated social media, including the BroadbandCensus Twitter feed, are not legal advice or legal services, do not constitute the creation of an attorney-client privilege, and represent the views of their respective authors.

Broadband Mapping

In Discussing ‘Broadband and the Biden Administration,’ Trump and Obama Transition Workers Praise Auctions



Screenshot from the November 2 Broadband Breakfast Live Online webcast

November 22, 2020 – In the event that the incoming administration of President-elect Joe Biden seeks substantial funding for broadband infrastructure, there is a strong likelihood that such monies would be channeled through a reverse-auction mechanism, said panelists at the Broadband Breakfast Live Online event on November 11.

See more from Broadband Breakfast Live Online, including “Broadband and the Biden Administration, Part II,” on December 2, 2020.

In a discussion with Broadband Breakfast Editor and Publisher Drew Clark, two broadband policy experts who served on the transition teams for Donald Trump and Barack Obama, respectively, championed the role of such a mechanism as efficient and fair.

Previous attempts to run funding through other selection processes provided funds only to the well connected, claimed to Mark Jamison, research and education director at the University of Florida, and who served on then President-elect Trump’s 2016 transition team.

Places with a Democratic governor or a congressman of either party that sat on a powerful committee were funded more often compared to other regions, Jamison said.

Whether or not funding mechanisms were in fact biased in that way, both Jamison and Technology Policy Institute President Scott Wallsten both praised the transparency and economic efficiency of the Federal Communications Commission’s reverse-auction funding mechanism.

Wallsten, an economist who was involved in the transition for then President-elect Obama, and who also served on the National Broadband Plan implemented in the first year of the Obama administration, criticized the Rural Utility Service and the old funding process of Universal Service Fund. Both said under these mechanism, a lot of money is spent without good information about how such funds are awarded or distributed.

Wallsten and Jamison agreed that more data would help make broadband funding more effective, they also said that the FCC was right to move forward with its Rural Digital Opportunity Fund auction on October 29 – part of the new auction-based approach to the Universal Service Fund – despite imperfect mapping.

In part, this was because any inadequacy of mapping data can be resolved in the challenge process, said Wallsten. Additionally, it is not clear that auctions like RDOF, or the Connect American Fund auction in 2018, would have yielded better results had the FCC waited to update their maps.

Jamison and Wallston also projected how the Biden administration might tackle net neutrality, Section 230 and antitrust regulation.

Jamison said that if the Biden administration reinstitutes net neutrality, it will quickly see that that won’t work very well.

Wallsten said that if it’s reinstituted the debate will be different than in the past. A large part of net neutrality is paid prioritization where third parties can pay ISP’s to put their content “at the front of the line.” He said that the pandemic has demonstrated why no paid prioritization may be a mistake, as many people need guarantees of stable connection for their schooling and telehealth applications.

Wallsten also noted that many made doom and gloom forecasts when the Trump administration FCC removed net neutrality protections in December 2017. None of those predictions came to pass, he said.

Both also agreed that the FCC should not be involved the regulation of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects tech platforms from liability for user-generated comments.

They also were wary of changes to the consumer welfare standard governing antitrust because, said Jamison, “If you’re not regulating for consumers, who are we regulating for?”

See “Broadband Breakfast Live Online on Wednesday, November 11: Broadband and the Biden Administration,” Broadband Breakfast

“Broadband and the Biden Administration” is sponsored by:

As with all Broadband Breakfast Live Online events, the FREE webcasts will take place at 12 Noon ET on Wednesday.

SUBSCRIBE to the Broadband Breakfast YouTube channel. That way, you will be notified when events go live. Watch on YouTubeTwitter and Facebook

See a complete list of upcoming and past Broadband Breakfast Live Online events.

Continue Reading

National Broadband Plan

National Broadband Plan Has Held Up Well, With Notable Downsides, Say Authors



Photo of Blair Levin, former executive director of the National Broadband Plan, by New America used with permission

June 29, 2020 — The National Broadband Plan has been successful, despite notable downsides, said panelists in a Federal Communications Bar Association webinar on Friday.

The plan, first released ten years ago, aimed to increase competition, provide lower-cost service to more Americans and decrease regulatory barriers to broadband rollout.

“Ten years in this space in terms of technology is remarkable,” said Rebekah Goodheart of Jenner & Block. “At the time only 15 percent of people had access… of 25 megabits… The fact that this plan was able to stand up through time shows how visionary it really was.”

“All the stuff that we’re taking for granted now are things that came out of recommendations from the plan,” she added.

Participants noted that, despite broadband access deficiencies amid the coronavirus, “overall broadband adoption rates [are] going up reasonably well right now,” said John Horrigan, Senior Fellow at the Technology Policy Institute.

But there are still significant barriers to unfettered telework capabilities, he said.

“We’re also waking up to the fact that smartphones, as useful as they are, have significant limitations for completing homework,” he said.

Ruth Milkman of Quadra Partners agreed.

“There’s a lot of stuff you can’t do on a smartphone,” she said. “It’s hard to read papers… and there are data caps, and it can be quite expensive if you try to use it in the same way that you would use a fixed wireline network.”

Blair Levin, non-resident Fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Project of the Brookings Institution, said that sections of the National Broadband Plan held up remarkably well, even ten years later.

“In the healthcare section which says, ‘We really need to utilize telehealth because someday there’ll be a pandemic’… it does look very prophetic,” he said.

Despite the proactivity of the policy, Levin said, it has certain shortcomings that the FCC should address.

“We’ve become much more aware in this society of different ways in which our institutions do not include everyone and lead to inequalities,” he said. “I would argue that absolutely needs to be a new plan… now it’s more important than ever because we recognize the importance of closing that digital divide.”

Continue Reading

Digital Inclusion

Authors of the 2010 National Broadband Plan Say That a ‘Refresh’ Should Not Only Be Up to FCC



Photo of INCOMPAS policy summit panelists discussing the National Broadband Plan by Adrienne Patton

WASHINGTON, March 4, 2020 – Panelists at the INCOMPAS policy summit Tuesday looked back with fondness on the Federal Communication Commission’s National Broadband Plan that was released 10 years ago this month. They agreed that if the plan is refreshed, the FCC should not be the lone agency to lead in the changes.

The 10-year-old plan was designed to “ensure robust competition” and “maximize the benefits of broadband,” while fostering the spread of broadband across the country, said INCOMPAS General Counsel Angie Kronenberg.

New Street Research Policy Analyst Blair Levin, who led the plan’s development, called it a “three-act play.”

The first act was the hiring people. The second act was holding hearings and acquiring data. The third act was an extensive writing process, Levin said.

When asked how the United States is doing in regards to the plan, Levin said there have been great improvements and some complications.

Mattey Consulting Principal Carol Mattey who worked on the plan, said it was a “long and evolutionary process,” that often required “nitty gritty details” from complex concepts.

Technology Policy Institute Senior Fellow John Horrigan, who also worked on the plan, said that while the statistics do not show a large increase in Americans that have wireline broadband at home, smart phones and mobile devices have made a huge difference.

Even so, Horrigan admitted that for children who have to do homework at home, smart phones are not enough.

However, Horrigan said the way that policy makers understand and think about the digital divide has improved.

A decade ago, city mayors were not concerned about digital inclusion, and now that has changed, said Horrigan.

Levin disclosed his frustration with the “metrics” section of the plan. The availability of bandwidth should not hinder economic growth, said Levin. But, “fundamentally we’ve made progress,” Levin admitted.

“The regulatory process is too slow to catch up,” and legislators are hesitant to look so far in the future while also considering cost concerns, said Mattey.

Looking ahead to a possible refresh of the plan, Horrigan said the FCC should not be the sole organization reworking the document.

Levin agreed and added that broadband has changed over the past decade as well. He called broadband a “mixed bag.”

The whole federal government should be thinking about how to revive the plan and take into consideration cybersecurity and privacy, Levin advised.

Continue Reading


Signup for Broadband Breakfast

Get twice-weekly Breakfast Media news alerts.
* = required field