Congress should create a new USF-funded broadband affordability benefit program that includes data, voice and text services, the National Digital Inclusion Alliance wrote Monday. Citing comments that it submitted in September to the USF bicameral working group, NDIA said it shouldn't be a direct replication of the affordable connectivity program or Lifeline but instead should incorporate facets of both. The program should apply to mobile and/or home broadband and to all plans that ISPs offer, providing at least $40 a month minimum for non-tribal households and $110 a month for tribal households, the alliance said. The design of such a program should be specifically about affordability, "ensuring households whose primary barrier to broadband adoption is affordability can get and stay online."
A state law barring the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) from sharing information about Lifeline program subscribers with other government agencies, including immigration authorities, means the state can no longer do its own Lifeline subscriber verifications, according to the FCC. The Wireline Bureau ordered Thursday that the state could no longer opt out of using the National Lifeline Accountability Database (NLAD) federal verification system. "Going forward, federal processes will be used to conduct eligibility verifications and perform duplicate checks for federal Lifeline program applicants in California."
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said the agency could look at driving “inefficiencies” out of the USF program and NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth clarified the agency’s focus for the BEAD program in separate Q&As onstage Tuesday at NTCA’s Telecom Executive Policy Summit. NTIA rules restricting the broadband funding that BEAD participants can receive are aimed at preventing bids that rely on “speculative, hypothetical funding” to complete their obligations and at avoiding defaults, Roth said. NTIA said Tuesday that it approved 18 state BEAD proposals (see 2511180007).
Consumers’ Research and its allies urged the FCC to zero out the proposed USF contribution factor for Q1 (see 2511100035), despite the U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer that the factor is constitutional (see 2506270054). “Several important arguments remain for why the USF, either in whole or in part, is unlawful, including in its application by the Commission,” said a filing Thursday in docket 96-45. The group makes a similar filing each quarter.
Congress, and the FCC, may face reduced pressure to reform the USF with an expected drop in its contribution factor, but calls for change won’t go away, experts said Monday. The USF contribution factor is expected to decline from 38.1% in Q4 to 30.9% in Q1, as projected demand decreases, analyst Billy Jack Gregg said Saturday in an email. That’s based on new numbers from the Universal Service Administrative Co.
Consumers’ Research and other parties challenging the legality of the USF contribution factor at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals urged the court not to allow various public interest groups to intervene. Motions to intervene were filed last month by the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition and jointly by the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, the National Digital Inclusion Alliance and the Center for Media Justice (see 2510300042). The 5th Circuit stayed the case Tuesday because of the federal shutdown (see 2511040071).
Democrats won Tuesday night in special elections for two Georgia Public Service Commission seats, marking the first time party members have earned spots on the regulatory body since 2006. Those victories were part of the Democratic Party’s broader rout in the elections, including selection of its candidates for governor in New Jersey and Virginia. Ex-U.S. Rep. Abigail Spanberger, who won the Virginia gubernatorial race, and Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who won in New Jersey, both raised internet issues during the campaign.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the USF in Consumers’ Research v. FCC could prove critical as justices hear argument Wednesday on President Donald Trump’s legal authority to impose tariffs, said Adam White, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, in a blog post Monday. The case turns on how justices view presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, White wrote. “If justices see the Trump tariffs as mainly a matter of foreign policy, and if they see IEEPA’s ‘regulate’ provision as ambiguous, then perhaps they will give substantial deference to the president’s interpretation.”
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday agreed to stay Consumers’ Research’s latest challenge to the USF because of the federal government shutdown, as requested by the FCC (see 2510310043), said an order in docket 25-60535. The request wasn’t opposed by any of the parties in the case. A lawyer involved in the proceeding said the order was “no big deal” and responds to a motion that the government is filing in almost all new non-urgent cases.
The FCC has asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay Consumers’ Research’s legal challenge to the USF because of the federal shutdown, said a motion filed Friday in docket 25-60535. The request for stay is unopposed, it said. The agency wants the court to stay the case until 14 days after the shutdown ends and extend all deadlines to the date the stay is lifted. The next filing deadline in the case is currently Nov. 10. The reduction in the FCC and DOJ workforces caused by the shutdown “has effectively eliminated the ability of counsel who have worked on and are familiar with this case to handle the litigation while the lapse in appropriations continues,” the filing said.