Democrats are expected to use their upcoming control of the House to push for strong net neutrality rules. Gigi Sohn -- a former lawyer at the Federal Communications Commission who is now a fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology, Law and Policy -- said she expects Democrats to use their new power to push for the restoration of strong net neutrality rules — and for the topic to be on the lips of presidential hopefuls. “I have no doubt that bills to restore the 2015 rules will be introduced in both the Senate and the House relatively early on,” Sohn said. “Every Democratic candidate for president, this is going to be one of their top issues.”

The Census Bureau released the 2013-2017 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates. Data on Internet subscription rates:

• Low broadband internet subscription rates were found in many counties in the upper Plains, the Southwest and South. The desert states of Arizona and New Mexico, south Texas, the lower Mississippi through Southern Alabama and some areas of the Piedmont of Georgia, the Carolinas and Southern Virginia were notable for containing many counties with low broadband internet subscription rates, although there were exceptions throughout.
• Some of the counties with the highest broadband internet subscription rates and lowest broadband internet subscription rates were in the South. Of the 21 counties with populations of at least 10,000 and broadband internet subscription rates at or above 90 percent, 12 were in the South, four were in the Midwest, four in the West, and one in the Northeast. Conversely, of the 24 counties with broadband internet subscription rates at or below 45 percent and populations of at least 10,000, 21 were in the South, two were in the West, and one was in the Midwest.
• Rural areas were not the only places with low broadband internet subscription rates. In some large cities, central counties lagged some of the surrounding counties. In the Chicago metropolitan area, the household broadband internet subscription rate was 77 percent for Cook County and 92 percent for nearby Kendall County. Los Angeles’ broadband internet subscription rate of 80 percent was lower than the 88 percent rate in Orange County next door. In the Washington, DC metro area, the broadband internet subscription rate was 78 percent in the District of Columbia, but 93 percent in suburban Loudoun County, Va.
• Lack of internet in rural areas was also notable for Native Americans, who had a 67 percent broadband internet subscription rate, compared with an 82 percent rate for non-Native American individuals. Native Americans living on American Indian land had a rate of 53 percent. 

The Rural Effect

The Census Bureau compared the broadband internet subscription rates for households in 704 completely rural counties with the households in counties that were “mostly rural,” and those that were “mostly urban.” (See the blog: “Rurality Matters.”)

• The average “completely rural” county had a household broadband internet subscription rate of 65 percent, 67 percent in “mostly rural” counties, and compared with a rate of 75 percent for “mostly urban” counties.
• Of counties with broadband internet subscription rates of 80 percent or more, 13 percent were “mostly rural” or “completely rural.” Of counties with broadband internet subscription rates of 60 percent or below, 88 percent were “mostly rural” or “completely rural.”
• In addition to rural context, median household income for a county was also associated with broadband internet subscription rates. In the average county where the median household income was below $50,000, roughly 65 percent of households had broadband internet subscriptions. In the average county with median incomes of $50,000 and over, more than 76 percent of households had broadband internet subscriptions.
• When taken together, median household income and rural context each had an association with household broadband internet subscription rates. In “mostly urban” counties with median household incomes of $50,000 and over, the average broadband internet subscription rate was roughly 80 percent, while in “completely rural” counties with the similar median incomes, the average broadband internet subscription rate was only 71 percent. “Mostly urban” counties with median household incomes below $50,000, on the other hand, only reported average broadband internet subscription rates of 70 percent while “completely rural” counties with similar median incomes had average broadband internet subscription rates of just 62 percent.
• Counties with high broadband internet subscription rates were found in “mostly urban” counties across the country, but especially on the Pacific coast and the Northeast. Some of the highest broadband internet subscription levels occurred in “mostly urban” counties outside the District of Columbia, Denver and Atlanta.
• Focusing on counties with populations of at least 10,000, there were 21 counties in which 90 percent or more of households had broadband internet subscriptions. All but one (Morgan County, Utah) were classified as “mostly urban” counties.
• 20 of the 24 counties with populations above 10,000 with the lowest level of home broadband internet subscriptions were classified as “mostly rural” or “completely rural.”
• The lowest broadband internet subscription rate was in Telfair County, Ga., with a broadband internet subscription rate of 25 percent. Telfair County, Ga., is classified as “mostly urban.”

In the hopes of increasing digital equity, here are some observations and suggestions for framing, enacting and collectively furthering digital inclusion policy. 1) Terminology helps frame policy. 2) Anchor policy in comprehensive frameworks. 3) Government has a role as a convener & participant, but not a singular responsibility. 4) Digital inclusion planning and policy should be intentional, and also nurtured. 5) Build community capacity and work with trusted ambassadors. 6) Read between the data lines.  7) An international hub for digital inclusion researchers, indicators, survey tools and data could make a significant difference in the field. 8) Embed and integrate digital inclusion into your mission and all layers of policy and programs. 9) Public benefit guidelines, regulation and partnerships can and should be used to address multiple aspects of digital inclusion. 10) Ensuring the authority for local governments to negotiate public benefits and consumer protections that are responsive to local needs is being strongly challenged and is a significant policy issue for the country. 11) Someone needs to do more to tackle consumer labeling, education, and awareness for broadband and telecom services. 

[David Keyes led the development of Seattle’s digital inclusion programs and policies. Amina Fazlullah is Policy Counsel with Common Sense Media and was formerly the Benton Foundation’s Policy Director.]

A group of 10 senators is calling on Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai to stand down on his proposal to classify text messaging as an information service. “We urge you to right this wrong and classify text messaging as a telecommunications service, affording this vital means of communications protections that promote innovation and support freedom of speech,” the lawmakers write in a letter led by Sen. Ed Markey(D-MA) and co-signed by eight Senate Democrats as well as Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Critics of the plan argue that reclassifying texts would give carriers the power to block messages as they see fit. The FCC proposal has already drawn the opposition of FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who said, “the claim that the FCC needs to classify text messages to protect consumers from unwanted texts is bogus doublespeak.”

At least 75 companies receive anonymous, precise location data from apps whose users enable location services to get local news and weather or other information. Several of those businesses claim to track up to 200 million mobile devices in the United States. The database reveals people’s travels in startling detail, accurate to within a few yards and in some cases updated more than 14,000 times a day. These companies sell, use or analyze the data to cater to advertisers, retail outlets and even hedge funds seeking insights into consumer behavior. It’s a hot market, with sales of location-targeted advertising reaching an estimated $21 billion. Businesses say their interest is in the patterns, not the identities, that the data reveals about consumers. They note that the information apps collect is tied not to someone’s name or phone number but to a unique ID. But those with access to the raw data — including employees or clients — could still identify a person without consent. They could follow someone they knew, by pinpointing a phone that regularly spent time at that person’s home address. Or, working in reverse, they could attach a name to an anonymous dot, by seeing where the device spent nights and using public records to figure out who lived there.

President Donald Trump said he intended to nominate William P. Barr, who served as attorney general during the first Bush administration from 1991 to 1993, to return as head of the Justice Department. A graduate of George Washington University’s law school, Barr, 68, got his start in the 1970s working for the CIA and later worked in the Reagan White House before leaving for private practice. In 1989, President George Bush appointed him to lead the Justice Department’s powerful Office of Legal Counsel, and later elevated him to deputy attorney general and then attorney general. After the Bush administration, Barr spent most of his postgovernment career as the top lawyer for the telecommunications company that became Verizon, from which he retired in 2008. He later joined the Kirkland & Ellis law firm.

Barr has criticized aspects of the Russia investigation, including suggesting that the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, hired too many prosecutors who had donated to Democratic campaigns. Barr has defended Trump’s calls for a new criminal investigation into his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton, including over a uranium mining deal the Obama administration approved when she was secretary of state. “There is nothing inherently wrong about a president calling for an investigation,” Barr said. “Although an investigation shouldn’t be launched just because a president wants it, the ultimate question is whether the matter warrants investigation.” Barr added then that he saw more basis for investigating the uranium deal than any supposed conspiracy between Trump’s associates and Russia. “To the extent it is not pursuing these matters, the department is abdicating its responsibility,” he said.