Luke Hogg: Fixing BEAD is Worth Minor Delays

The United States has committed billions of dollars to close the digital divide through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. But until recently, the program’s rules favored one technology above all others: Fiber.

That approach threatened to undercut the program’s goal of getting fast, reliable internet to every American, regardless of where they live or how hard they are to reach. Now, thanks to a long-overdue course correction from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, BEAD is finally embracing technology neutrality.

Under the previous framework, BEAD treated only fiber-to-the-home projects as “priority” investments. Other technologies such as fixed wireless and low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite services, were neglected and made eligible only after fiber builds had been exhausted. This policy discouraged state officials from even considering faster, more flexible, or more cost-effective alternatives even in areas where fiber makes little sense such as the mountains of western Colorado. The result was a system that picked winners and losers based not on fiscal or practical realities but on poor assumptions.

Revised public policy notice fixes an error

NTIA’s recently revised public policy notice fixes that error. Going forward, any broadband project that meets BEAD’s performance standards (at least 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds, with low latency) can qualify as a top-tier project. Whether it relies on buried fiber, a radio transmitter, or a satellite constellation doesn’t matter. What matters is what it delivers. That simple change opens the field to a broader range of providers, encourages innovation, and allows states to choose the best solution for the geography and needs of each community.

That flexibility is especially critical in rural and remote areas, where laying fiber can be slow, expensive, or downright impossible. For a farm miles from the nearest town or a home tucked into a valley in the Rocky Mountains, wireless or satellite service might be the only practical way to get online.

Fixed wireless systems can be deployed in weeks rather than years. Satellite services like Starlink and Project Kuiper can beam high-speed internet to a rooftop dish without needing a single trench dug. Technological advancements in recent years mean that these technologies are no longer second-tier fallback options, they’re legitimate first-choice options for consumers, and NTIA now recognizes that reality.

The benefits of this shift go beyond just reaching difficult terrain. Technology neutrality injects competition into the process. More technologies in play means more bidders, more proposals, and more pressure to keep costs down. States are now required to prioritize the lowest-cost bids that meet technical standards.

That means every taxpayer dollar goes further, helping more households get connected. Even better, the new rules ask states to consider how quickly each network can be deployed. For families still waiting to get online, time matters. A slightly cheaper solution that takes years to build isn’t necessarily better than one that costs a bit more but can be live in a few months.

New rules aren't abandoning fiber

Critics argue that loosening the fiber preference could shortchange long-term value. But this isn’t about abandoning fiber. It’s about using the right tool for the job. Fiber remains the gold standard for bandwidth where it’s practical. But insisting on fiber everywhere, regardless of cost or feasibility, leaves many communities stuck in limbo.

We can’t afford to leave rural communities unserved for years while funds get tied up in slow, expensive projects, especially as advancements in precision agriculture built on broadband networks are increasing agricultural efficiency. A mixed approach, using fiber where it makes sense and filling in the gaps with wireless, cable, or satellite, is smarter, faster, and far more practical.

Of course, changing course midstream has consequences. Many states had already developed plans or selected preferred providers under the old rules. NTIA’s update will force them to take a short detour: rescind preliminary awards, open one more round of applications, and update their plans to reflect the new rules. That will cause some delay, but it’s a manageable delay.

States have 90 days to run this supplemental process, and NTIA will review their final proposals within another 90. Given that the Biden administration failed to get a single BEAD dollar out the door in over three years, the Trump administration’s prudent move to potentially save years of wasted effort and billions in misplaced investment is worth the additional delay of a few months.

The BEAD program’s goal hasn’t changed. We still need to connect every American to high-speed internet. What’s changed is that we’re now giving ourselves a better shot at success. By letting fiber, fixed wireless, satellite, and other technologies compete on a level playing field, we’re giving states the freedom to find the best solutions for their unique challenges. And that’s what will finally close the digital divide; not rigid mandates, but results-driven flexibility. A short delay is a small price to pay for getting that right.

Luke Hogg is the director of technology policy at the Foundation for American Innovation. This Expert Opinion is exclusive to Broadband Breakfast

Broadband Breakfast accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to commentary@breakfast.media. The views expressed in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadband Breakfast and Breakfast Media LLC.