Republicans Kill Popular FCC Program That Made Broadband Affordable For The Poor

from the this-is-why-we-can't-have-nice-things dept

The FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), part of the 2021 infrastructure bill, currently provides 23+ million low-income Americans a $30 broadband discount every month. While it didn’t get much hype, that’s a big deal in a country where broadband affordability is a massive obstacle to adoption due to muted competition and high service prices.

But those 23 million Americans are poised to soon lose the discount because Republicans — who routinely dole out billions of dollars on far dumber farerefused to fund a $4-$7 billion extension.

As a result, the FCC is notifying households that signed up for broadband service during the pandemic that they’re about to see a dramatic spike in their broadband bills starting in April:

“Many of these households have contacted the Commission to express their disappointment
and frustration that they can no longer sign up for the program. Others have contacted the
agency to express concern about the impending end of the program, noting its impact on older adults, families with school children, and military families at risk of losing their internet
service without the ACP benefit,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel in her letter to Congress.
“They worry that without ACP support they will lose access to employment, education, health
care, and more.”

Republicans claim they opposed the ACP because it was “wasteful.” But these are the same Republicans that gave AT&T a $42 billion tax break for doing nothing (technically less than nothing: they eliminated 42,000 jobs not long after). Republicans love slathering telecom giants with badly managed subsidies, tax breaks, regulatory favors, and merger approvals in exchange for bupkis. But helping the poor? No way.

For whatever reason the FCC is too polite to clearly mention that opposition by numerous key Republicans are the reason the bill is going away. Similarly, the press outlets that can be bothered to cover this kind of stuff (it doesn’t get engagement and clicks so why bother) also often can’t be bothered to mention that the GOP is directly responsible for the death of the program.

Republican telecom policy basically involves letting giant regional monopolies crush competition underfoot, rubber stamping anti-competitive mergers and consolidation, and opposing all broadband consumer protections. The argument is this creates some sort of innovative Utopia; the reality is it results in market failure, regulatory capture, patchy coverage, high prices, and slow speeds.

Democrat telecom policy usually involves either doing the same thing as Republicans (see: Joe Manchin), paying empty lip service to “solving the digital divide,” or proposing fairly toothless initiatives years after they’re needed (see: the broadband nutrition label). Most Democratic telecom policy leaders can’t even acknowledge that telecom monopolies exist and cause competition problems in public statements.

Still, Democrats occasionally stumble into the path of productive ideas in the realm of antitrust reform and consumer protection. The GOP genuinely could not care less about the American telecom/broadband/television consumer, and there are 40+ years of hard evidence.

The ACP was initially a rare, bipartisan way to bring some temporarily relief to low-income users struggling to afford access. Throwing money at big telecoms to temporarily lower prices (that wouldn’t be high in the first place without their assault on competition) isn’t ideal; but it was at least something.

Now, low-income Americans who signed up for already expensive service will see a dramatic uptick in their broadband prices, potentially severing them from opportunity. Press outlets won’t cover it because the subject doesn’t get enough ad engagement. And if they do cover it, their “fair and balanced” “both sides” approach often gives the GOP policy credibility the party doesn’t actually deserve.

The GOP considers it a win that the infrastructure bill won’t get credit for helping the poor during election season, knowing the infotainment press lacks the backbone to clearly illustrate how the decision hurts the poor (a large percentage of the GOP’s own constituents). Democratic FCC regulators won’t really fight for it because being too politically combative puts future think tank or lobbying positions at risk.

So U.S. telecom policy will stumble on apace, with Americans paying some of the highest prices in the developed world for substandard broadband access. Same as it ever was.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Republicans Kill Popular FCC Program That Made Broadband Affordable For The Poor”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
80 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
JJ (profile) says:

So according to the GOP, handing out money to broadband providers in exchange for providing service to those who need it is “wasteful,” but giving them money to do nothing at all is just fine. Government should support these billionaires, but we have to make sure no poor people get any benefit from it!

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:

Yes, and AT&T paid their share of taxes, and the shareholders also paid taxes a second time on the capital gains. But Karl is not arguing that they need to pay for public services, i.e. police, fire, school, army. What he is saying is that those people who produce goods for others, should have their wealth stolen and given to those who don’t produce more than they consume.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:3

The wealthy produce nothing you imbecile. Their workers do.

Yes, Bill Gates literally produced nothing and didn’t work, he wasn’t responsible for revolutionizing the computer industry, which changed everyone’s life for the better.

We should steal all his money, because the fast food workers of the world, are the ones who created microsoft.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:

Are you truly that stupid? You cannot figure out that tax breaks to pad the riches pockets are theft from the American people.

How is it theft from the American people? you seem to be under the impression that rich people make money by theft, instead of creating goods and services for others.

You are saying that the government not stealing money form rich people, in a country that already has a progressive tax rate, amounts to stealing from poor people?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:3

You see when 1 person has the same amount of wealth as 100 million people and doesn’t pay taxes then that means the cost of giving them tax breaks is on the same people.

You seem to be delusional if you think they don’t pay taxes, and you also seem to be delusional, because you think that their wealth is all tangible consumer goods, that are able to be transferred to other people.

You can tax Bill Gates all you want, and at most all you have transferred is an airplane, a mansion, a nice car.

However those billions of dollars in stock, cannot be converted into consumer goods with the magic wand of taxes.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Tell us how well versed you are in analyzing tax deductions, wealth sheltering schemes, and so on? What is your particular education in this field?

Worked for H&R block many years ago, and I am literally watching Jarome Powell right now, and have reported OpenAI to the IRS, so I think I know pretty well how it works.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Ah, so your argument is that the super-rich pay taxes to the same extent that we schmoes do? Like, 30-40% off the top?

Well, they do in reality. Then they get the majority back in tax breaks. So the end result is that they pay far fewer taxes, but individuals like the revenge porn king will always have an argument in the fact that the initial amount paid is the same.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

giving them money to do nothing at all is just fine.

I think you misspelled “giving them money to ‘create jobs’ for retired congresspeople”.

Though, admittedly, I’d prefer to see low-income (not necessarily “poor”) broadband access programs funnel money to someone other than the giant monopolists. Like community broadband, which even without a low-income discount is often cheaper than the discounted monopolist service.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
31Bob (profile) says:

This is the same group of clown shoes that declined Federal funding that would cost the states little/nothing, to provide $40 per month for food to poor kids over the summer.

The reason? Solely to make Biden look bad. That’s it!

These people are fucking garbage. Every. Goddamn. One.

Every single person that votes Republican is a traitor to the country they live in and should be treated accordingly.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

“So not taking money from taxpayers is “treason””

Who is “not taking”? It is not the GOP you are referring to, obviously, because as we all know they are some of the worst when it comes to taxing the not rich into oblivion.

Austerity does not work, this is evident from the numerous times it has been attempted and failed miserably … for those not rich, it was a huge success for the rich, mostly if you are short sighted

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Strawb (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

You thought all that “free money” comes without costs?

Free things have a cost? Then why did you claim:

[…]there is literally free food in this country, including food stamps, and emergency food pantries, and direct food deliveries (for the elderly).

…in another comment?

Is it because you’re so full of shit you can’t keep track of it yourself?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

“Austerity does not work, this is evident from the numerous times it has been attempted and failed miserably”

“Yeah? how is that Inflation treating you? You thought all that “free money” comes without costs?”

False dichotomy. Are you claiming that if the poor are not oppressed financially, that means inflation will prevail?
Ha – I guess that was skipped over in econ 101.

“Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation.” – Milton Friedman

“Inflation is the cruelest tax.” – Milton Friedman

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew N. Bennett (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

31Bob will not admit that his comment was incorrect because it would involve a Techdirt user admitting that they were incorrect; an impossible circumstance. This is because he does not hold cryptocurrency, and is therefor unintelligent. Instead he will insult you with a reddit-tier statement and smug air of moral superiority.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re:

It most certainly is the job of the government to assist those most in need.

People like you are why the world can’t have nice things.

No, its the governments job to help those who cannot help themselves, if they entered into the social contract and paid into the social security system.

People might “need” food, water, shelter, but nobody “needs” high speed broadband, but when you can convert every want into a need, the needs will be infinite.

Moreover, capitalism is what creates the wealth of nations, and communism has repeatedly led to mass starvation and atrocities, all cloaked in the fabric of “the greater good”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

So, denying that the US, that great defender of capitalism, hasn’t commited their fair share of war crimes and crimes against humanity since at least 1945?

Or the colonial powers didn’t do their fair share of crimes against humanity when THEY had control of the world?

Or that capitalism also created Hitler, Putin AND Xi?

Maybe it’s YOU that needs the bullet, insurrectionist scum.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Or that capitalism also created Hitler, Putin AND Xi?

Hitler — created by communists burning the Reichstag
Xi — serves in the communist party
Putin — served in the USSR KGB

Or the colonial powers didn’t do their fair share of crimes against humanity when THEY had control of the world?

This is so funny, its like the monty python skit in “life of brian”, i.e. what have the romans ever done for us.

Look, the colonial powers literally believed in the “white mans burden”, they literally shoved technology down the throats of everyone else, and in the process of doing so ended slavery, monarchy, and in some instances cannibalism (e.g. Borneo, N.W. USA).

Sure they BTFO’d a bunch of pre-industrial societies so they could take control, and sure they thought that they were barbarians and looked upon them with disgust, but you seem to ascribe some cartoon evil movie villain qualities to them.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
MrWilson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

People might “need” food, water, shelter, but nobody “needs” high speed broadband, but when you can convert every want into a need, the needs will be infinite.

No, high speed internet is both a need and a human right at this point. It’s necessary for education, for utilizing increasingly more complex government websites, for accessing public services, for accessing healthcare, etc. More and more services are moving to web appointments with video conferencing. More government websites are getting dynamic, interactive content. And studies have shown that students with no access or slower access at home perform worse than students with high speed access, so it’s an equality in education issue, which is an important factor in giving the poor skills and opportunities to no longer be poor.

This information is available on the internet. Hopefully you have high speed internet so it’s easier for you to educate yourself on the topic instead of spewing this just world fallacy bullshit.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re:

Tell me you’ve never been in the position where $30 could be the difference between eating that day or not without telling me you’ve never been in that position.

Stop lying, there is literally free food in this country, including food stamps, and emergency food pantries, and direct food deliveries (for the elderly).

If you got to the point where you went hungry because you didn’t have money, its because you didn’t look or try hard enough.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

'Surely the leopards won't take a SECOND bite if elected...'

If only there was some way for those people to return the favor to the party that just screwed them to score cheap political points, some upcoming opportunity that would allow the families that just had the aid they were receiving kneecapped because the republican party considers helping the non-rich ‘wasteful’, a chance to make clear who they do and do not believe should be in a position to make those sorts of decisions…

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re:

the republican party considers helping the non-rich ‘wasteful’

it is wasteful, but i don’t expect you to understand economics, and the value / price dichotomy. Taxpayers are paying for internet, for people who were unwilling to sacrifice either their labor or some other good, because they did not value it as much. This is the same phenomena that the soviet union and China learned, when they tried their experiments in central planning, and why they moved to a market economy.

However central planning is great, if your goal is to create a population that is entirely dependent upon the whims of the bureaucratic class who produce nothing, and who steal from the leaky bucket of wealth redistribution.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Taxpayers are paying for internet, for people who were unwilling to sacrifice either their labor or some other good, because they did not value it as much.

Ah, so the poor are poor because they are lazy. Not because they are incapacitated, or having to care for dependents after a spouse died/left/became incapacitated, or because they only have 2 full time jobs paying minimum wage in an area where housing is generally unaffordable, or…

Yeah, it’s all their fault. Got it.

Or perhaps you don’t have a clue.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

How does a free market capitalist rationalize paying full time employees less than what it takes to provide food and shelter for same within a reasonable commute? This does not even consider cost of the commute.

How does one put together a business model where one or more bullet points indicate the required level of governmental support of their potential employees .. in order for the business to be profitable?

I’m sure there is some rational explanation for all the full time employees who struggle financially. Hint, they are not all on drugs – cause I know that is what you will say.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Benjamin Jay Barber says:

Re: Re: Re:

How does a free market capitalist rationalize paying full time employees less than what it takes to provide food and shelter for same within a reasonable commute? This does not even consider cost of the commute.

Because he can externalize those costs, when the government takes money from other people, those other people are subsidizing his low wages.

Otherwise they literally would demand more money, because it would be fundamentally impossible to show up to work.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

” impossible to show up to work.”

Yup.
If the rightwingnuts actually achieved their wet dream of eliminating “entitlements”, business types would soon be screaming that they can not find anyone to work at the low wages they offer. They will whine until the government helps them pay their essential workers.

I say let the businesses fail, that is what the free market would do – right?

If you are unable to pay your employees a living wage because then your business would fail … perhaps your business is not viable.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

“This guy gets it.”

I feel so dirty.
The hypothetical situation described above would never happen, if it did there would be chaos, I doubt the captains of industry intend that to happen. The not rich tax payers will continue to subsidize the uber riche and essential employees will continue to scrape by and be blamed for their poverty.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

How does a free market capitalist rationalize paying full time employees less than what it takes to provide food and shelter for same within a reasonable commute?

The usual rationalization is that people won’t take jobs that don’t meet their needs; if they pay sucks, the employer will have to offer more money to get employees. Not very satisfying, and it didn’t seem to match reality before COVID (but remember in 2021 how everyone seemed to be hiring, to the extent even places like McDonald’s were offering more than minimum wage?—that’s probably worthy of further study).

For what it’s worth, it was only about 10 to 20 years ago that people started pushing the idea that people should be able to live well, while being paid literally the least amount of money it was legal to pay them. Minimum wage used to be for, like, high-schoolers living for free and needing a bit of extra money to keep their broken-down rusted-out shitbox of a car drivable—temporarily, till they could get a “real” job. To some degree, that’s still who’s taking those jobs (except they want a phone, not a car); and since the capitalists with good amounts of money tend to be on the older side, they’re probably thinking along the same lines.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Min wage on a summer job could also pay for a year of college. Now a full-time job all year doesn’t even pay for just tuition.

Yeah, very true, but that’s more a function of tuition inflation and “job requirements inflation”. There are apparently some 40 universities in Europe that will educate international (immigrant) students at no cost to those students, so… if scholarships, apprenticeships, and cheap local schools are out of the question, that might be preferable to decades of debt.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

“job requirements inflation”

lol – Why does a McJob require a High School diploma?

Some job listings seem to be written by ChatHR, they may list a requirement that prospective employee have x number of years experience in BLAH programming when the software in question has only been on the market for a few months.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

lol – Why does a McJob require a High School diploma?

Such “inflation” isn’t just stupid, but actively counter-productive. I know someone who worked as a medical lab technologist. Took an inexpensive 2-year practical college course in the 1970s, phoned up someone they knew who’d taken it before—”Does your lab have any jobs?”; “Yeah, can you start next week?”—and then worked like 30 years at that job, doing what they’d been well trained for.

By the year 2000, that job required a 4-year university degree. And since the program was largely theoretical, the veteran workers had to train each new hire for their first year or two; “these people don’t know a damn thing”, I heard repeatedly. But apart from pulling the occasional person out of retirement, they couldn’t find anyone better. “Worker shortage.”

As for the “McJobs needing diplomas/degrees”, those companies are actively selecting against the traditional pool of cheap labor. Is it any wonder that those who remain are not content with the traditional shitty pay?

Anonymous Coward says:

“Well, they do in reality.”

Capitol Gains are taxed at a much lower rate that ordinary income. This is a huge break for those who possess large amounts of money. Ordinary people pay tax for ordinary income, it is progressive, fwiw. Some super rich do not have much ordinary income as it is all capitol gains resulting in a much reduced tax rate. It is supposed to encourage investment, not sure it is working as advertised.

dickeyrat says:

“…Republicans love slathering telecom giants with badly managed subsidies, tax breaks, regulatory favors, and merger approvals in exchange for bupkis. …” Ah, but not necessarily. Knowing no more than I do, I would wildly speculate that the telcos are a great source of campaign contributions, also perhaps good quality hallucinogens, young waif-like ladies and maybe even multi-million dollar RVs and yachts for the hordes of Rethugnican ‘hos who infest D.C. like cockroaches in the back room of a Del Taco. The GQP doesn’t give out favors for free; there has to be some kind of cash-flow originating at the behemoth Cable & Telco firms that maintain chokeholds over the Amerikan wireless universe. Just one more aspect of Making Amerika Great Again. Just sayin’ …

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...