Commissioners Expected to Approve Lifeline Changes 2-1 With Limited Changes
The FCC's controversial NPRM on Lifeline rules appears likely to be approved 2-1 Wednesday, with a dissent by Commissioner Anna Gomez and only limited changes, said industry officials engaged in the proceeding. Groups seeking changes to the rules said they remain hopeful that commissioners will tweak the NPRM to address their concerns.
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!
The draft NPRM proposes new requirements for demonstrating eligibility to receive Lifeline funds, including requiring applicants to submit full nine-digit Social Security numbers and using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program for household eligibility verifications (see 2601280058). The NPRM also asks about requiring a secondary verification of consent for applicants to enroll in Lifeline or transfer to another provider. Gomez was quick to criticize the NPRM last month after it was circulated by Chairman Brendan Carr (see 2601270051).
Only a handful of parties reported on meetings at the FCC after the NPRM was circulated, including public interest groups that asked the agency to “reimagine” its approach (see 2602120025). A lawyer who represents small carriers noted that many more comments are usually filed in response to an NPRM than ex parte filings when the draft notice is before commissioners.
Cheryl Leanza, policy adviser for the United Church of Christ's Media Justice Ministry, told us she hopes and expects that Gomez and Commissioner Olivia Trusty will “press to improve the NPRM.” In the past, the FCC has been willing to modify NPRMs “even in areas where there is vigorous disagreement” about the “goal or purpose.” Leanza was among those who met with commissioner aides about the item.
JudeAnne Heath, executive director of Hispanic Tech & Telecommunications Partnerships, said her organization and the other public interest groups had “productive conversations” with aides for the commissioners. An examination of the Lifeline program must focus on the “experiences of those it was made to serve,” she said in an email. The NPRM should examine “barriers to participation in the program and if the program is actually meeting eligible recipients' modern-day communications needs.”
Public Knowledge and the other groups "made a strong case" that the FCC should serve "as a facilitator of universal service and not as a gatekeeper to access," said Alisa Valentin, PK’s broadband policy director. The agency should ask why the Lifeline program is underutilized, “what barriers prevent low-income households from enrolling” and how proposed changes like a requirement to disclose sensitive information “can harm the vulnerable populations this program is meant to help,” she said.
In another ex parte filing of note, the National Lifeline Association said it supports the goals of eliminating waste, fraud and abuse, but it also urged the FCC to ask whether the $9.25 monthly support amount “is enough to make entry-level broadband plans affordable for Lifeline-eligible households.”
Free State Foundation President Randolph May said he supports the various measures proposed to maintain the efficiency and integrity of the Lifeline program. “Otherwise, absent such safeguards to combat fraud and abuse, like any benefit program, public support for Lifeline will diminish,” he said in an email. Ultimately, Congress should “reform Lifeline along the lines of the voucher-like Affordable Connectivity Program to put the decision-making choice regarding the provider in the hands of the consumer.”