Democrats Hope Talks Favor $100B for Broadband

“I'd say there's progress," but "there's still a ways to go" on the counterproposal, Capito told reporters. Lobbyists are unsure whether funding for broadband and other infrastructure areas Senate Republicans included in their initial plan (see 2104220067) will be higher in the revised offer.

Senate Commerce Committee Chair Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., believes talks will progress enough so the committee can mark up its part of the bill within the next few weeks. The panel’s March broadband hearing (see 2103170068) showed bipartisan agreement “on the need” for connectivity funding in a package, and the “challenging” part remains settling on a compromise dollar figure, she said: It’s important lawmakers commit to substantial connectivity funding if they don’t want to have the same discussions about bridging the digital divide in 15 years.

“I’m hopeful” Republicans will increase their broadband figure and reach a deal closer to what the Democrats propose, said Senate Communications Subcommittee Chairman Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M. “There’s not one of our colleagues who doesn’t understand the difference between fast internet and slow internet,” especially after connectivity’s increased importance during COVID-19, he said. “We’ve got to get this right.”

“I like” the Democrats’ proposal and “we’re going to fight hard to get” a final deal to be “as close as we can get” to $100 billion, said House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania. A bipartisan pact “is the preference, obviously.” Commerce Committee Democrats are eyeing how to proceed on their portion of an infrastructure package, lobbyists noted. Democrats are interested in blending the broadband-focused Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act (HR-1783/S-745) into the larger Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow's (Lift) America Act (HR-1848) if there's no bipartisan deal, lobbyists said.

“Negotiations going on in the Senate will dictate when we can move ahead in the House” on marking up committees’ contributions to the larger infrastructure package, Doyle said. “We’re hoping to” pass a combined package through the House “before the August recess, but I don’t know that that’s been decided yet. What will determine that” is what happens in talks between Senate Republicans and the Biden administration.

House Commerce’s focus on “getting this infrastructure package through” is likely to continue to delay work on other priorities for the foreseeable future, including progress on new net neutrality legislation (see 2103020057), Doyle said. “We are going to” get to a net neutrality bill this Congress, but “it’s not on the schedule yet” as an immediate priority. Doyle and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said in March they intend to refile their Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (see 2103020057).

A group of 59 congressional Democrats urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York to not pursue a limited infrastructure package in hopes of winning GOP support. “While bipartisan support is welcome, the pursuit of Republican votes cannot come at the expense of limiting the scope of popular investments,” the Democrats wrote Pelosi and Schumer. “We ask that you work with the White House to prioritize transformative legislation that our voters were promised."

Hearings

House Appropriations Financial Services Subcommittee Chairman Mike Quigley, D-Ill., said during a Tuesday hearing he agrees with this administration’s view that broadband must be “one of the main priorities in an infrastructure package.” Congress’ funding of the Emergency Connectivity Fund and emergency broadband benefit program via COVID-19 aid legislation “are just the beginning,” he said. It’s important that lawmakers “fully incorporate lessons from the pandemic” and “ensure we get the most value for each dollar we invest.”

Appropriations Financial Services ranking member Steve Womack, R-Ark., urged fellow subpanel members to examine the efficiency of existing federal broadband programs before committing to further major connectivity funding. “We’ve thrown a ton of money” at federal programs and should be “making sure that we’re getting the maximum amount of benefit,” he said. It “would be a crying shame if we threw” additional money “at this problem right now and five years from now we’re still talking about this” connectivity gap.

Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., noted his interest in reclassifying broadband as a Communications Act Title II service to ensure the federal government consistently treats it as a utility. “When we all say” broadband is “like water or electricity, I want to ask ‘why don’t we really mean that?’” he said. “If we really mean that,” shouldn’t government move on reclassification “so that it would regulate it like a common carrier and provide greater access to people?’” Pocan disputed claims that “some people couldn’t care less about” having broadband access. “I call that on my BS meter,” he said. “Even my 92-year-old mother, who doesn’t work on a computer, talks through her Alexa” device.

Witnesses broadly supported more broadband funding and FCC plans to improve its broadband coverage maps (see 2103230071).

Rural broadband is “neither cheap nor easy,” said Yelcot Telephone and Mountain View Telephone Vice President Lang Zimmerman, speaking on behalf of NTCA. “Any plan that calls for broadband deployment … should match resources to the size of the problem.” Ensure broadband money goes to unserved areas and “seek to build the best kinds of networks,” he said.

“We need to fund a program that will provide long-term, sustainable support for the poorest Americans,” said National Urban League Senior Vice President-Advocacy and Policy Joi Chaney. Federal funding will be most important at the beginning of such a program so “the neediest in our society won’t have to wait,” and “industry [needs] to put skin in the game.

Center on Rural Innovation Executive Director Matt Dunne urged funding for “building future-proof” networks, arguing if lawmakers don’t, “we will be back here five years and billions of dollars later discussing once again the inequity in broadband connectivity.” Partnership for Public Service CEO Max Stier urged requiring agencies to “regularly collect and report on data around access, use and satisfaction with their digital services.”

NTCA CEO Shirley Bloomfield during a Senate Finance Committee infrastructure hearing urged “clear standards for what will be expected of and achievable by providers looking to leverage any resources made available through” future broadband programs. She cited shortcomings in FCC administration of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I (see 2104090039). “Agencies should stringently review and weight the technical, managerial, financial and operational capabilities of applicants or bidders as part of the process of deciding on any award of funds to serve an area,” Bloomfield said.