Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer recently signed an executive order directing state and district agencies to work together and expedite permits for broadband and other infrastructure projects. The order aims to expand statewide internet connectivity and keep Delaware businesses competitive by reducing regulatory bottlenecks. It’s one of many state and federal initiatives to remove barriers to the deployment of next-generation broadband.
Delaware has the right idea. Reducing government overreach to unlock broadband’s potential won’t just deliver reliable, speedy and affordable internet while reducing the digital divide between our rural and urban communities. It will also support American leadership in cutting-edge data-intensive technologies, including AI, autonomous vehicles, and telemedicine, granting millions of Americans unparalleled access to economic, healthcare and educational opportunities. But policymakers still have more work to do.
In 2021, Congress voted to provide $42.5 billion to state and territory governments for deploying high-speed internet access through the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, one of 16 federal initiatives dedicating more than $413 billion for broadband expansion. As the recent Minnesota daycare fraud illustrates, massive federal grants administered by states and localities create opportunities for waste, abuse, and inefficiencies as bureaucrats overseeing and spending taxpayer funds bear neither the risk of failure nor commercial reward for success.
Ensuring BEAD-funded infrastructure projects meet their goals while shrewdly stewarding funds requires that governments repeal unwarranted regulatory hurdles while maintaining guardrails for accountability and public welfare. However, many states get this balance wrong.
California requires AT&T to maintain expensive and outdated copper-wire landline networks that don’t provide competitive broadband speeds and are susceptible to hacking and copper theft. 99.7 percent of served Californians can access at least three alternatives — including mobile networks and voice over internet protocol (VoIP) delivered online. The copper-wire requirement diverts funds from high-speed broadband infrastructure building and maintenance. AT&T reports that it costs them $6 billion annually to maintain such networks nationwide. The company recently received federal approval to retire 30 percent of its copper-wire networks, excluding California.
With fewer households opting for landline connections, these mandates should be confined to localities where landline is the only option and should be phased out as modern networks reach them. At least 20 states have or are abolishing such mandates. They conflict with the Trump administration’s commitment to “technology neutrality,” which makes satellite internet providers like Starlink and Amazon LEO eligible for BEAD funding as they offer a cost-effective alternative to fiber networks for many areas. Commendably, the FCC is considering a permanent rule that will streamline approvals for providers to discontinue copper networks. The agency also plans to scrap at least 18 other “outdated and obsolete” mandates regarding everything from telegraphs to phone booths, in order to cut red tape, expedite deployment and modernize networks.
Barriers to constructing and upgrading utility poles can also stymie broadband deployment. Maine, which received $50 million in BEAD funds, recently expanded a rule allowing towns to force removal and relocation of existing poles, creating uncertainty and costs for providers. Many of these are in rural areas that could benefit the most from expanded network access. Infrastructure providers must also comply with federal, state and local permitting processes, rights-of-way approvals and environmental reviews. These are important processes, but may be duplicative and carry inconsistent criteria and standards that increase costs. They would benefit from streamlining, better inter-agency coordination, and clearer timelines. Federal bill H.R. 2289 would address some of these issues by imposing deadlines for processing permits on state and local authorities, limiting what they can require from applicants, and limiting local fee recovery to “actual and direct costs.” Allowing for full business expensing of infrastructure investments would also lower after-tax costs and encourage new capital-intensive broadband projects without raising direct federal expenditures. Requiring transparent, competitive bidding for BEAD-funded contracts would also foster competition while limiting cronyism and government favoritism.
Cutting-edge broadband is vital for the rapid and secure movement of high volumes of data necessary to develop and execute life-changing AI models and applications. Robust and stable fiber networks foster model training, rapid inference and data center linkage while reducing latency that can render real-time tools like predictive analytics, chatbots and virtual assistants ineffective and sluggish. Latency and outages can be fatal for high-stakes applications like finance, healthcare and cybersecurity. Even fraction-of-a-second delays can make a life-or-death difference for autonomous vehicles and industrial robots.
State and local authorities should be able to make public interest and safety decisions on network infrastructure that they’re best placed to make. But the immense benefits of expedient network deployment and plethora of existing rules and mandates that fail the cost-benefit test call for reducing bureaucracy in broadband.
The FCC can continue playing its part by reforming rules within its discretion. Federal policymakers can help by placing sensible limits on state and local regulation, and through conditioning BEAD funding to states and localities on procompetitive reforms that maximize the value of those dollars.
