Experts Question Rural Voters' Support for 2020 Democrats' Broadband Plans

Rural broadband connectivity isn't the only telecom issue mentioned on the campaign trail; others include prison phone rates and undoing the FCC's rescission of its 2015 net neutrality rules. But it has clearly gotten the most attention, said Public Knowledge Policy Director Phillip Berenbroick. “Part of it is” that all the candidates are vying for Iowa voters in that state's first-in-the-nation Feb. 3 caucuses “and a big issue in a lot of the rural states is access to broadband,” he said. “The campaigns understand these communities want connectivity and feel they've been left behind,” especially amid the rollout of 5G in more urban areas.

President Donald Trump repeatedly voiced interest in working with Congress on an infrastructure package, including rural broadband, but “we haven't actually seen anything that would really do that,” Berenbroick said. The communications sector hoped for more appetite for infrastructure legislation this year because Democrats regained the majority in the House in the 2018 election (see 1811130011). Talks between Trump and Democratic leaders on a potential infrastructure package broke down in May (see 1905220076).

“The moment has passed for infrastructure legislation” to have a viable path forward before the 2020 election, said Cowen’s Paul Gallant. “There was a brief window” during the last Congress when political dynamics would have made a consensus possible but once Democrats won the House majority last year “that complicated dealmaking” significantly. Trump in 2018 proposed $50 billion in federal funding for rural infrastructure projects allocated via state block grants, but the proposal congressional Democrats criticized it for not including dedicated broadband funding (see 1802120001).

“While Democrats are picking numbers out of the sky” in their broadband pitch to voters, the president “has been busy delivering real results,” emailed a Trump campaign spokesperson. “This administration has focused on expanding broadband infrastructure, including investments in the cutting-edge industries to include rural broadband.”

Five Democratic candidates still in the race proposed broadband funding plans in recent months, including four of the five hopefuls usually at the top of most recent primary polls -- former Vice President Joe Biden; Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.; Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota also proposed broadband funding as part of her campaign (see 1908070070).

Sen. Kamala Harris of California, the other leading Democratic presidential candidate, hasn't released a specific broadband funding proposal but has spoken generally about the need to increase it. A climate policy platform she released Wednesday proposes requiring federal agencies to partner with rural electric cooperatives to help rural communities that lack broadband access. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee released broadband-related plans before suspending their presidential quests (see 1908210055).

Political Impact

Broadband funding proposals gave presidential rivals an opportunity to distinguish “their views on the role of government,” Gallant said. Announced plans range from Biden's $20 billion proposal to Sanders' $150 billion, which would require “Big Tech companies to pay into" the USF (see 1908220061). “Biden is more moderate and centrist,” while Sanders “has a more revolutionary tone to a lot of his policies,” Gallant said. Congressional Democrats focused on their Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow’s (Lift) America Act. HR-2741 would allocate $40 billion for broadband projects, $12 billion for next-generation 911 and $5 billion for a loan and credit program for broadband projects (see 1905150061).

In making concrete broadband proposals, the Democrats send “a strong signal to rural voters that they matter” in a way the party failed to do during the 2016 election, said University of Minnesota political science professor Tim Lindberg. The candidates' rural-focused plans alone aren't “going to move the needle very much” in swaying those voters from Republicans, Lindberg said. “There are so many other issues on a local level that seem to be more pressing,” like the economy and healthcare.

“You have to override” many rural voters' “belief in smaller government,” Lindberg said. “If you're saying the federal government is going to provide $80 billion-worth” of broadband funding, “that's going to be a hard sell” to rural voters. Trump would “need to continue to lose support” from rural voters at the same rate he has in recent months over his trade policies and other matters for the Democrats' proposals on broadband and other rural issues to sway that part of the electorate, said Texas Tech University political science professor Seth McKee. “Otherwise it's going to be so marginal” an issue “that it doesn't even register when you look at the polls.”

Lindberg and McKee divided on which party would benefit politically from the Trump-Capitol Hill impasse over infrastructure legislation. “Democrats would have the high ground on that if they can be convincing in their argument,” McKee said. “Infrastructure was the one [policy] issue” on the agenda after the 2016 election “that clearly would have had bipartisan support but Trump never” followed through.

“Both parties” can use the federal impasse on infrastructure to sway rural voters, but “I don't think either the Republicans or the Democrats are going to use it well,” Lindberg said.

Policy Debate

The Democratic contenders' interest in rural broadband likely means “for the first time, specific broadband commitments will be part” of the Democrats' election platform, Gallant said, citing earlier comments (see 1908280041). “It fits naturally with a broader infrastructure pitch,” he said now. “Broadband is one of the sexier pieces of infrastructure, so I'm sure it will be highlighted,” especially once the party adopts its platform during the July Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee.

“There now seems to be national recognition that large stretches of rural America do not have broadband” access and “that so many candidates on the Democratic side are talking about the need for rural broadband funding is good news,” said Internet Innovation Alliance honorary Chairman Rick Boucher. “Good things can come from that in terms of solid proposals” for a new administration if Trump loses re-election. “It's terrific” it's getting attention now, said Boucher, saying he was talking about it as Democratic House Communications Subcommittee chairman before the 2010 election.

Talk about broadband funding during the primaries only makes the policy debate “even more complex” because it will raise questions about potential federal action even as state governments move forward with their own plans, said American Action Forum Director-Technology and Innovation Policy Will Rinehart. “It doesn't mean that an infrastructure bill is going to be any more likely to pass during the next Congress.”

Net neutrality isn't likely to draw much attention during the primaries because there's no real distinction among the Democrats' positions here, Berenbroick and others said. Seventeen of the 21 current Democratic hopefuls declared support for restoring in some form the rules. Biden, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, Miramar, Florida, Mayor Wayne Messam and businessman Tom Steyer haven't taken a position.

If a question on net neutrality came up in primary debates, “you might see people competing to have the strongest answer but essentially they'd all have the same response ... to put the old rules back,” said Free Press General Counsel Matt Wood. Legislative efforts to restore the 2015 rules drew unanimous Democratic support in the Senate last year and in the House this year (see 1904100062), so it would be “surprising if there was any candidate” for the party's presidential nomination who opposed those regulations, Berenbroick said.