Fiber Lobbyist: Keep States in Control of BEAD
Other broadband industry groups made similar asks in a separate letter to the Trump administration.
NASHVILLE, June 1, 2025 – The Fiber Broadband Association joined those urging the Commerce Department not to make sweeping changes to the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program.
States “have the best understanding of their budget, the topology, their climate, unique challenges, and the families and communities that they seek to serve,” the group wrote in a Friday letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. “There is no group better qualified and accountable to make the best decisions on which technology should be used to serve each broadband serviceable location in their state.”
The Trump administration has put the program on hold at the federal level while it plans updated rules aimed at taking a more “tech-neutral approach,” as opposed to the current rules favoring fiber broadband projects. That guidance is expected to come down in June or July.
There’s been increased political pressure on Commerce not to hand down sweeping changes – namely a per-location spending cap – that could require states to redo much of their work. Other telecom trade groups including USTelecom and NRECA wrote a similar letter to President Donald Trump last week, the latest in a steady drumbeat of letters from state and federal lawmakers and other stakeholders.
State broadband offices, tasked with choosing how to spend the funding allocations they received in 2023, have been continuing to accept and process applications under the current rules. More than 40 have begun or finished the process. Three states had finalized grant winners and received approval in January under the Biden administration, but their money has also been held up by a grant manager review.
West Virginia had finished an all-fiber plan, but was in March given 90 days to revise the document to line up with Trump administration priorities. The extension was later extended to every state and territory.
Fiber funding in Louisiana, Delaware and Nevada
Allowing states to stay in the driver’s seat would indeed entail funding fiber. The three states whose plans were approved (Louisiana, Delaware and Nevada) selected fiber projects for the majority of their eligible homes and businesses, and state broadband heads have said it’s a priority to deploy as much fiber infrastructure as possible while still connecting everyone. Current BEAD rules give fiber projects priority, but allow states to fund other technologies if no fiber providers are interested in a given area or if deploying fiber would be too expensive, something states can decide for themselves.
FBA said the National Telecommunications and Information Administration should follow the industry’s recent private investment and let states follow through on supporting fiber projects. The major wireless carriers are deploying cash to expand their fiber networks as quickly as possible, a bid to offer bundled fixed and mobile broadband. The group noted other ISPs like Ziply and cable operator Altice are also laying fiber in places where it’s more economical to do so than the rural areas targeted by BEAD.
“The Commerce Department can give these communities, and their residents, businesses, and institutions, the same opportunities that the private sector is giving to most all of the U.S.,” FBA wrote. Those would include infrastructure for mobile service, public safety, AI, and “future services that we cannot even imagine today.”
NTIA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
FBA CEO Gary Bolton told reporters at the group's Fiber Connect conference here he was hopeful the NTIA would act soon and “make the right call.”
“The new administration wants to get it right,” he said. “It just feels like we’re getting close to something.”
Bolton echoed complaints from contractors and ISPs in Louisiana, given approval in January, who say they can’t afford to stay in a holding pattern after making investments to prepare for BEAD projects that aren't yet underway.
“These are family-owned companies, these are not corporations with deep pockets,” he said. “So these delays are very hard to deal with when you don’t have the wherewithal to be able to wait 90 days, or months, or a year.”
