Senators Eye Reliability as Broadband Spending Debate Factor

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., are to meet with Biden administration officials Wednesday to talk about how to move forward on infrastructure spending. Schumer told the Senate Democratic caucus Tuesday the leaders intend to discuss both the ongoing talks on a bipartisan compromise and the possibility of advancing infrastructure legislation via the budget reconciliation process, which would require only Democratic votes to pass, aides told us.

National Economic Council Director Brian Deese and other White House officials met with moderate senators Tuesday on the state of talks on a coming bipartisan proposal led by Sens. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., and Rob Portman, R-Ohio. A circulating draft calls for $65 billion for broadband, the same amount the administration previously offered to support during unsuccessful talks with Senate Republicans on another plan (see 2105270072). Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., described the meeting to reporters as “all positive, all bumpy.”

Sens. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, Todd Young of Indiana and other Republicans during the hearing highlighted calls from Wireless Infrastructure Association CEO Jonathan Adelstein to make connectivity language in an infrastructure spending package more technology neutral if Congress wants to make that legislation a key driver for addressing network resiliency. He and others worry the Biden proposal’s language would direct too much money to fiber.

The federal government shouldn’t put all of its “eggs in the basket of one type of technology” in fiber “that's very exposed and not” allow any other type of technology “to be considered,” Adelstein said. “When it comes to future proofing,” Congress should “make sure that we're not only giving money to” fiber providers but also “make sure that it's being distributed” to wireless and other technologies that can be “sustainable.”

Fischer said she’s concerned Democrats’ calls for tying some broadband infrastructure funding to services, raising minimum broadband service to 100 Mbps symmetrical speeds will mean consumers in areas that haven’t even reached the FCC’s current 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload threshold will “slip through the cracks.”

Lujan countered Adelstein’s claims that lawmakers should craft connectivity funding language in a way that allows wireless and other technologies to compete for the money because those technologies constitute an adequate “substitute” for fiber. “I agree that we should be working to look at a comprehensive approach here,” but it’s “hard for me not to push back” on claims wireless can “replace wireline,” particularly in rural areas, Lujan said. “Wireless depends on fiber too.”

Golden West Telecom CEO Denny Law earlier told Lujan he believes “there is nothing superior” to fiber “on the market” in terms of performance or scalability. “We still use fiber that was deployed” in the 1990s in some areas of Golden West’s network and that’s “proven to be very resilient medium to deploy upgrade and scale” over the last three decades, he said. “I think it's absolutely critical that any future broadband funding that is discussed” should focus on “what type of networks” the U.S. wants “not just today but tomorrow, because if you only use the capabilities by the applications that you use today it will be outdated by the time is money out the door.”

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., also pointed to the need for “future-proof” networks and cited resiliency language in her Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act broadband bill (HR-1783/S-745). The Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow’s America Act infrastructure bill (HR-1848) also includes resiliency requirements (see 2103110060).

Senate Communications ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., urged lawmakers to be cautious in writing a broadband title in an infrastructure bill. “Far too many times, our Congress has attempted to spur broadband deployment by providing large sums of funding” with “little to show” for it, he said. “I believe we should make smart investments while maintaining the regulatory regime that allows companies to make the kind of” investments “that have resulted in strong and resilient” U.S. networks. “We must remove the regulatory and permitting hurdles that delay” buildouts, he said. “Additional funding should also be targeted” at “unserved areas” instead of overbuilding “existing networks.”

Lujan believes lawmakers “have to find some common ground and legislate on” improving communications service reliability. He believes U.S. providers “reinvest” some of their profits “towards ensuring that their users have access to resilient, redundant and secure networks.” They “must be built” in a way that ensures no “single piece of faulty equipment” disrupts a provider’s service or “national service across multiple carriers,” Lujan said. It’s “not acceptable” that the FCC doesn’t already have “broadband resiliency requirements” and that there are no “nationwide requirements for reporting” outages.

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., invoked S-1506, saying it’s “clear that climate change is a threat to our networks while our communications infrastructure is itself fueling this ever-growing crisis.” The measure would authorize $5 billion for a new NTIA program to fund grants and revolving loans for projects designed to strengthen communications networks’ resiliency and increase energy efficiency (see 2104290079).