New BEAD Rules Trigger Uproar Over U.S. Broadband Future

WASHINGTON, June 6, 2025 – A sweeping rewrite of the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program has already drawn talk of lawsuits and political blowback, as awardees under the original rules say they may not reapply.

Under a new Commerce Department policy notice released Friday, internet service providers awarded funding under the original BEAD framework must now re-bid if they want to continue participating. The new rules also abandoned the Biden-era fiber preference in favor of a  technology-neutral, lowest-cost-per-location model.

“I think people are going to feel betrayed,” said Josh Ethridge, co-owner of EPC, a fiber construction firm in Louisiana, that had been preparing to undertake approximately $275 million worth of broadband deployment projects under the state’s initial BEAD plan. “It’s quite obviously a ploy for fixed wireless services,” he added.

“I think [the Commerce Department] just made 56 enemies,”  said Alexis Schrubbe, director of the Internet Equity Initiative at the University of Chicago's Data Science Institute. “First and foremost, it removes any technology preference whatsoever… All of the work that state broadband offices undertook over the last two years, that's all wiped clean, and they have to do it again.”

“Nobody is going to reapply,” Etheridge said, “you can't beat a fixed wireless or satellite project” under the new scoring rubric.

“A fiber project cannot win against a fixed wireless,” broadband analyst and consultant Doug Dawson agreed. “The entire Southwest is going to get fixed wireless.”

“I'm thinking lawsuits are going to come from attorneys general,” Dawson added. “It might be a whole lot of them.” He said the department's new rules may violate the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which established statutory guidelines for BEAD.

“The technology neutrality is foolish, because this was supposed to be a long-term investment,” said Christopher Mitchell, director of the Community Broadband Networks initiative at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, who hosted the conversation on Connect This!

Kimberly McKinley, chief of staff at TAK Communications, said Republicans were already positioning the policy rollback as a political win. “The Republicans are already swinging this in their favor,” McKinley said. “[They] are going to take the glory of how they got this out the door.”

Reactions poured in following the release of the new BEAD policy notice around 1 p.m. ET Friday.

Digital rights groups warn of ‘penny-wise, pound-foolish’ policy shift

The Benton Institute said the shift toward cheaper infrastructure like fixed wireless and satellite will “cement the digital divide for decades” and undermine U.S. competitiveness.

“Secretary Lutnick wants to invest in the ‘cheapest’ broadband infrastructure, not the best broadband infrastructure. It’s a self-inflicted wound to American competitiveness,” said Benton’s Director of Policy Engagement Drew Garner. 

Garner said the U.S. will lag key rivals.

“China and Europe are going all-in on fiber to position themselves for AI. Under Secretary Lutnick, America is getting cheap, unreliable networks. That’s the definition of penny-wise, pound-foolish,” he lamented. 

Public Knowledge, a nonprofit advocating for consumer rights and open internet policies, urged the Commerce Department to reconsider.

“By diverting billions in funding to cheaper technologies like low-Earth orbit satellite service, which are more costly for consumers, technologically inferior, capacity-limited, and environmentally constrained, the Commerce Department is wasting public dollars on services that cannot deliver what communities need,” wrote PK’s Government Affairs Policy Advocate Nat Purser. “This would constitute a historic policy failure for an administration attempting to save the public money while offering more efficient services.” 

Jessica Dine, policy analyst at New America’s Open Technology Institute, told Broadband Breakfast NTIA’s temporary block on spending BEAD funds for non-deployment activities was only adding to the confusion.

“Instead of preserving leftover funds to address broadband adoption, access to devices, and similar needs, states can no longer know whether their broadband investments will be accompanied by programs to promote demand. By deferring this important aspect of BEAD guidance altogether, NTIA is showing a real lack of interest in addressing the adoption gaps that are a major driving force behind the digital divide,” Dine said.

Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., Ranking Member on the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee, called the new guidance a delay of “once-in-a-generation investments” and a betrayal of bipartisan congressional intent. Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., the ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, accused Republicans of hypocrisy for forcing states to start plans from scratch.

Industry groups and officials on the other side of the debate, however, welcomed the shift.

The wireless industry hailed the changes

“Importantly, the updated guidance broadens the slate of solution providers, particularly those that prioritize the most cost-effective technologies suited to each location,” said WISPA’s President and CEO David Zumwalt. “By removing the program’s rigid and costly regulatory overlays, the new guidelines encourage investment, innovation, and faster outcomes

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey, who volunteered his state to be an early adopter of the new guidance in March, issued his own statement applauding the changes.

“We know that the terrain and realities of West Virginia demand flexibility,” Morrisey wrote, applauding the updated BEAD guidance. West Virginia had planned to deliver fiber to every home and business, and received few non-fiber applications under the original framework.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said NTIA should quickly issue its promised further guidance on allowable non-deployment activities.

“NTIA is right to curb the expensive fiber overreach,” ITIF’s director of broadband and spectrum policy, Joe Kane, wrote. “Next stop: affordability.”