More Than 160 State Senators Call for Commerce to Release BEAD 'Savings'
A group of more than 160 state legislators from 28 states urged the Department of Commerce on Tuesday to release BEAD program non-deployment funds. “Congress was clear: non-deployment investments are not optional extras, they are central to BEAD’s mission,” they said in a letter, which was shared in a release from the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. “This unprecedented opportunity was created in direct response to NTIA’s call for efficiency. To now deny states the funds their efficiency generated would penalize success and undermine BEAD’s purpose.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth has said the agency hasn't made final decisions yet on what will happen with the non-deployment funds, but it's "operating under the assumption states will get to use BEAD savings" (see 2512020015).
Calling non-deployment funds “savings” in an effort to “claw back” BEAD money from the states is “cynical beyond belief,” said Missouri state Rep. Louis Riggs (R) -- a signatory of the letter -- in an interview. The states need the roughly $20 billion in non-deployment funds to pay for critical activities connected with broadband buildout, such as pole attachment, workforce training, enhanced cybersecurity and efforts to increase broadband adoption, he said. Siphoning off that money is contrary to the intention of Congress and imperils the success of the program, Riggs argued. “These folks are trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”
Congress “wisely designed BEAD so that any funding not spent on deployment could be used for other 'non-deployment' purposes,” the letter said. “This structure not only encourages efficiency and rewards states for deploying ahead of BEAD, it gives states the flexibility they need to address every aspect of the digital divide, not just those related to rural last-mile rural infrastructure.”