The NTIA Must Not Allow BEAD to Fall Victim to Past Mistakes

Like a broken record, the government has a terrible habit of repeating mistakes. Frequently, these mistakes take the form of the government announcing a new program to much public fanfare with promises that this program will solve a particular problem once and for all.

Unfortunately, the problem is rarely solved, but a large amount of taxpayer money is squandered in the process despite numerous red flags. This increasingly appears to be the story of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment program.

Designed to expand high-speed internet access to all Americans and help close the digital divide, the BEAD program also includes a wide range of political wish list items that have little to do with achieving this goal. It now appears that many of these items are, at least, partially responsible for the program’s slow implementation.

In June, the BEAD program came under intense scrutiny for the lack of progress that has been made since it was first created in 2021 as part of President Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Commenting on the situation, Brendan Carr of the Federal Communications Commission noted that even years after the program’s announcement, “it has not connected even 1 person with those funds” and that the NTIA now says that “no construction projects will even start until 2025 at the earliest.”

Carr places much of the blame on “Climate change mandates, tech biases, DEI requirements, favored government-run networks + more.” Such political items have nothing to do with connecting Americans but have been inserted into the program anyway.

Developing appropriate systems for grant distribution

Program proponents argue that such characterizations are inaccurate and gloss over the complexity of implementing a $42.45 billion program (an amount larger than many state budgets!). For instance, before breaking ground, the NTIA must first develop appropriate systems for grant distribution, establish state broadband offices, and work with the FCC to determine unserved and underserved locations. In May, NTIA’s chief administrator, Alan Davidson, told lawmakers that across all NTIA programs, “we are hitting our marks,” noting that the BEAD program’s first two years focused on “planning and preparation” and that 2024 would be “a year of execution.” 

However, such comments are hardly reassuring to the millions of Americans who either have slow internet or none at all. Moreover, technological innovation is happening at a breathtaking speed, making reaching all Americans quickly particularly important.

Proponents also do not explain some of the program’s biggest problems, namely the pure volume of red tape and questionable government requirements that slow implementation. Lawmakers have raised questions about many of these requirements on several occasions.

In an April 2023 letter to Davison, 11 senators expressed concern that “current BEAD rules divert resources away from bringing broadband service to rural America and are inconsistent with NTIA’s statutory authority in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.”

Requiring providers to prioritize hiring practices?

The letter specifically questioned dubious stipulations like requiring providers to prioritize hiring union labor and “individuals with past criminal records.” The letter also mentioned concerns related to things like the preferential treatment of government-owned networks over private networks, a bias for certain technologies, and climate change mandates that require eligible entities to “account not only for current [climate-related] risks” but also for future risks that are likely to increase the cost of bringing broadband connectivity to more Americans.

More recently, the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee published a report on the program, highlighting concerns about “duplicative spending and anti-competitive, anti-consumer technology bias,” the last concern referencing BEAD’s fiber bias. The report concludes that while $42.45 billion should be “more than sufficient to bring broadband connectivity” to every corner of the country, this goal may go unrealized if the program gets dogged down by unnecessary requirements.

The American Consumer Institute has also raised concerns that the NTIA may unlawfully introduce rate regulation into the BEAD program and favor municipal broadband providers over private proprietary providers, like wireless providers, which research suggests routinely outperform their government-operated cousins.

To date, the NTIA has been unable to appropriately address many of these concerns, calling into question whether the agency will squander a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to provide all Americans with access to high-speed internet. BEAD’s goal of closing the digital divide is an admirable one, and for that reason, the government must keep its eye on the prize and not fall victim to the minefield of regulations that have befallen so many other programs.

Nate Scherer is a Policy Analyst with the American Consumer Institute where he researches and writes about a diverse range of consumer issues. He previously served as a Policy Analyst at the Reason Foundation and has also worked for several other nonprofits including the Texas Public Policy Foundation and the Leadership Institute. More recently, he worked an educator for Fairfax County Public Schools and performed research for Georgetown University’s Edunomics Lab. The 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.