• Michigan Coalitions

  Will incumbent ISPs unfairly secure a majority of BEAD funding?

  Posted by DrRon Suarez on October 6, 2024 at 9:20 am

  There are valid concerns that incumbent ISPs might unfairly secure a majority of the BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) funding, despite the program’s intent to prioritize underserved and unserved communities. BEAD funding, part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), aims to expand broadband access and address digital equity, which are critical goals. However, incumbents like AT&T, Comcast, and others have considerable advantages that might position them to dominate the grant process.

  Here are some key concerns regarding how incumbent ISPs might secure the majority of BEAD funding:

  1. **Lobbying Power and Political Influence**: Large incumbent ISPs have significant lobbying power and well-established relationships with policymakers at both federal and state levels. This influence allows them to shape regulations and policies in their favor. They could potentially pressure state broadband offices to award them a larger share of BEAD funding.

  2. **Mapping and Data Control**: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) uses broadband maps to determine areas that are unserved or underserved. Historically, these maps have been criticized for inaccuracies, largely because they rely on self-reported data from ISPs. Incumbent ISPs might underreport service gaps to make areas appear well-served, which could disqualify certain regions from receiving BEAD funds intended for underserved communities. This gives incumbents an advantage in regions where they already have infrastructure.

  3. **Bidding Requirements and Capacity**: BEAD funding requires applicants to meet certain technical and financial criteria. Incumbent ISPs, with their existing infrastructure and resources, are often better equipped to meet these requirements. Smaller, community-based ISPs or cooperatives may struggle to compete because of fewer resources and less experience in navigating complex grant application processes.

  4. **State-Level Biases**: Each state has significant autonomy in determining how to allocate BEAD funds. In some cases, states may prefer to work with incumbent ISPs because they are familiar with them and see them as “safe bets.” This could crowd out community-based initiatives and cooperative ISPs, even if they are better aligned with the goals of equitable broadband deployment.

  5. **Preference for Fiber**: While fiber infrastructure is a key priority for BEAD, incumbent ISPs may have more extensive existing fiber networks, allowing them to apply for funds to extend those networks rather than invest in entirely new ones. Community-driven ISPs or smaller providers, particularly those focused on wireless or alternative technologies, could be overlooked in favor of large incumbents’ fiber expansion plans.

  ### How to Address These Concerns

  1. **Improved Transparency in Mapping**: Accurate, community-verified broadband maps are essential. There have been efforts to improve these maps, and communities need to ensure they provide input to correct inaccuracies.

  2. **Prioritizing Local Solutions**: State broadband offices should prioritize applications from locally-owned ISPs, cooperatives, and municipal networks that are more likely to invest in the community and ensure long-term stewardship of the networks. Local coalitions should engage in the process and advocate for criteria that weigh community impact over incumbents’ track records.

  3. **Capacity-Building Support for Local ISPs**: Providing technical assistance and grant-writing support to small ISPs and community cooperatives can help them compete with incumbents for BEAD funding.

  4. **Community Advocacy and Monitoring**: Community stakeholders must be engaged in the process of how BEAD funds are distributed, holding their state officials accountable and advocating for public interest. Grassroots organizing and public pressure can help ensure that the funds are used to genuinely address digital equity and access.

  While it is possible that incumbent ISPs could secure a large share of BEAD funding, a combination of community advocacy, policy oversight, and capacity-building for smaller ISPs can help ensure that the funds are allocated in a way that genuinely addresses broadband equity and promotes sustainable, community-owned networks.

  DrRon Suarez replied 1 month, 1 week ago 1 Member · 0 Replies

  • Michigan
• 0 Replies

Log In to Reply