Trends in Lifeline Reform: A Look at the Evidence, Not the Politics

According the latest Census data on computer and Internet use, 85.7% of Americans have fixed-line broadband service in the home. But during the COVID pandemic, it is the 14.3% of broadband “have nots” getting all the attention. Congress is now contemplating spending as much as $100 billion on programs to bridge this “Digital Divide,” adding to several existing billion-dollar-plus federal programs addressing broadband adoption and network expansion—including the Federal Communications Commission’s Lifeline and Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Programs (and its predecessors). The data clearly reveal what is already known and reported: “major carriers were required to shed a significant number of Lifeline subscribers after stricter policies were implemented by the FCC in 2012.” My statistical analysis of the data confirms that the reductions in Lifeline subscriptions since 2016 follow the same trend established between 2012 and 2016. Moreover, the first major order on Lifeline by the Trump Administration’s FCC was in November 2019. If blame is to be assigned for reduced enrollment in the Lifeline Program, then blame falls in the lap of the Obama Administration, though taking blame for curbing waste, fraud and abuse is no disgrace. With more expansive broadband subsidies on the table, it is critical that the FCC continue its efforts to better administer the Lifeline Program. Despite its flaws, Lifeline may be the mechanism for allocating increased broadband subsidies for low-income Americans. If the Digital Divide is to be bridged, then it is vital to respect what funding is available and distribute it wisely and effectively