Today, the House passed two important bills designed to fix our nation’s faulty broadband maps.  Accurately mapping the availability of broadband internet service is essential to promoting the deployment of high-speed service to all Americans, especially those in unserved and underserved areas.  We thank Committee members for working on these bipartisan bills, and we urge the Senate to act soon to ensure the reliability of broadbands maps so investments in broadband can have maximum impact.

H.R. 4229, the “Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act” or the “Broadband DATA Act,” was introduced by Rep. Dave Loebsack (D-IA) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Ranking Member Bob Latta (R-OH).  This legislation requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to issue new rules to require the collection and dissemination of granular broadband availability data and to establish a process to verify the accuracy of such data, and more. 

H.R. 4227, the “Mapping Accuracy Promotion Services Act” or the “MAPS Act,” was introduced by Reps. A. Donald McEachin (D-VA) and Billy Long (R-MO).  This legislation specifies that it is unlawful for a person to willfully, knowingly, or recklessly submit inaccurate broadband service data. 

The debate over what constitutes high-speed broadband has heated up as the Federal Communications Commission collects comments for its next report to Congress on the state of broadband availability. At stake is whether the FCC gets to regulate broadband to ensure it meets Congress’s goal of universal service. Arguments include debating whether 25 megabits per second (mbps) down/3 mbps up is not fast enough, whether the FCC’s deployment numbers are skewed because of bad data, and whether the FCC should be looking beyond availability to how many people actually access broadband, rather than simply where they could access it. A look at who is making which arguments related to speed, and why, as the FCC prepares to collect string on the 2020 report:

Fast Enough. Broadband providers represented by NCTA-The Internet & Television Association (which represents the larger incumbent cable operators) told the FCC it should definitely not increase the 25/3 speed threshold, and even suggested that that speed might be too high of a metric for availability. Though NCTA conceded there are still deployment gaps, it suggested the best way to fill them would be to target funds where there is no broadband at all -- the so-called "unserved" rather than "underserved" population. 

Need for Speed. In a joint filing, advocacy groups Public Knowledge, Next Century Cities and Common Cause told the FCC it should raise the high-speed broadband definition to 100 Mbps. They argue the agency should skate to where the puck is going to be. They concede that 100 Mbps is a “bold” approach, but say it is warranted. They interpret the mandate as requiring the FCC to “continuously improve” its speed standard, and point out it has remained the same for the past four years while innovation and consumer demand have not. “The [FCC] proposal to maintain the current benchmark broadband speed without even inquiring what future benchmarks may be necessary runs contrary to the Commission’s congressional mandate,” the groups have argued.

Need for Blazing Speed. INCOMPAS, with members that include Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Netflix and Twitter, are going the activist groups one better. Make that 10 times better. They say the FCC’s new high speed benchmark should be speeds of 1 Gigabit per second and that it should be “future-proofing” the definition of broadband. They argue that 1 Gig isn’t an aspirational target for the future, but “rather a sensible standard” that consumers are buying now.

Kansas City prides itself on being a national leader for digital equity. Becoming the first Google Fiber city in 2011 launched KC into the spotlight as it became America’s first gigabit metropolis. The city runs a  top-notch coalition for digital inclusion, launched a civic association to promote digital equity, and hosts Gigabit CIty Summits to showcase advanced technologies from around the country and the world. And yet, questions have lingered about how well Kansas City has done to address the digital divide. A 2017 Brookings study of broadband availability and adoption ranked Kansas City only 84th out of the top 100 cities. The SHLB Coalition and the Kansas City Public Library hired Dr. John Horrigan to review the City’s progress in solving the digital divide using data from the American Community Survey (ACS).  His report, released last week, shows that KC has made significant progress. The combined Kansas Cities (MO and KS) increased their broadband adoption by 16.5 percent from 2013 to 2018, compared to the average rate of 14.7 percent increase in 10 other comparable cities. But because the city started at a lower level of adoption, it has climbed only to the middle of the pack.  The combined Kansas Cities show an overall adoption rate of 84.1 percent, comparable to the national average of 85.1 percent. 

In North Dakota and beyond – the internet is as common in everyday education as the chalkboard. “It’s our job to teach them to use (the internet) responsibly,” Midway (ND) Superintendent Roger Abbe said, “whether they have access at home or not.” Midway’s classrooms are an example of the benefits local communities reap from a high-speed internet connection. Jason Keating, a high school principal at Midway, said students there are learning about psychology, agriculture, astronomy and the like through the ND Center for Distance Education, and Keating himself teaches a math course that’s broadcast to students in Hillsboro (OR). That all depends on strong broadband in the state – the kind developed by federal programs, telecommunications companies and a state with its eye on the future.

ND officials argue that the state has done well in the internet age. Duane Schell, the state’s chief technology officer, cited an internet database that he said shows 100% of ND residents have “access to mobile broadband,” which means they can tap into the internet wirelessly. And 90%, he said, have access to one-gigabit broadband, a particularly fast service. A May report from the state’s information technology department shows ND was recently listed second in the country for “internet access” (as of Dec 2019, it was ranked 11th, with MN ninth and SD 43rd). Schell said ND’s high spot on the list has to do partly with local providers working hard to take advantage of federal programs to help expand ND’s network. The state’s geography helps, too; ND is a comparatively easy state to link up to the internet – flat or rolling fields in many areas. “It’s a lot easier to plow fiber in North Dakota than it would be in a state like Montana or Wyoming,” Schell said. 

But for the remaining 10% of the population that struggles to connect with fixed high-speed internet, Schell sympathizes. Part of the problem, Schell said, is in rural areas around major ND communities. “There’s a common provider that exists in those regions, and that provider has not been as aggressive in those federal programs as the rural telcos have,” he said. “The rest of the story is…(in) some of our most rural and remote areas. As a provider, (telecommunications companies) are out there to make a living. In some of these rural and remote areas, the business case (to expand) has become exceedingly challenging.”

House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission  Chairman Ajit Pai concerning the troubling lack of transparency, and an apparent lack of appropriate process, leading up to the FCC’s approval of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger. Chairmen Pallone and Nadler are troubled by the allegation that the original analysis drafted by the FCC’s merger task force may have been supplanted later with an analysis that downplayed the competitive harms of the merger.  The Chairmen believe the FCC provided an insufficient opportunity for public review and comment on material changes in the record based on the consent decree between the parties and the Department of Justice, as well as additional information submitted by the parties to the Commission. Chairmen Pallone and Nadler also expressed concerns about ex parte conversations that took place between representatives of T-Mobile and the FCC Commissioners, the filings of which may not have complied with the FCC’s ex parte rules. Chairmen Pallone and Nadler are requesting answers to the following questions or requests by January 6, 2020:

• Did the FCC seek the opinion of the Office of General Counsel regarding the possible need to provide the public with an additional comment period after the DOJ announced its consent decree, yes or no?  If so, please provide all communications during the pendency of the FCC’s merger review—covered by the Federal Records Act—between officials at the FCC regarding the need to seek an additional comment period regarding the merger review.
• Is the FCC investigating T-Mobile’s compliance with the ex parte rules, yes or no?  If so, when does the FCC expect to complete the investigation?  If not, does the FCC plan to open an investigation, yes or no?
• Provide all drafts of the merger order, including the draft originally circulated to the Commissioners, and each subsequent draft.

The Federal Communications Commission will conduct a transparent public auction that allows all bidders the opportunity to buy what the mobile industry deems prime real estate in their effort to roll out 5G networks nationwide. The sale could yield an estimated $20 billion to $40 billion for the US Treasury, help mobile carriers build 5G networks, and offer wireless internet service providers the opportunity to bring high-speed broadband to rural and hard-to-serve areas—if policymakers get this moment right.

Everyone agrees that roughly half the spectrum should go to mobile 5G broadband providers. But the satellite companies wanted to privately sell the spectrum, even though they only have a temporary license to share the C-band. The lower portion of C-band that is auctioned will generate billions. Congress should invest that money in fiber and other broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas. In addition, the upper portion of C-band, which will remain in use for satellites, should be shared on the ground to allow rural wireless internet service providers to deploy their own networks. This would present providers with an affordable way to access the airwaves needed to extend high-capacity wireless services to homes and small businesses in those same areas where building out fiber is too slow and expensive.

[Michael Calabrese is director of the Wireless Future Project, which is part of New America’s Open Technology Institute. Amir Nasr is a policy analyst at New America’s Open Technology Institute.]

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai announced that Jonathan McCormack will serve as a deputy director of the Rural Broadband Auctions Task Force. In 2017, Chairman Pai formed the Rural Broadband Auctions Task Force in order to implement and oversee the agency’s efforts to efficiently distribute Universal Service Fund support to expand the deployment of fixed and mobile broadband networks to unserved parts of the United States. McCormack currently serves as an attorney advisor in the FCC’s Office of Economics and Analytics. He was a recipient of the FCC’s 2019 Employee of the Year award for his contributions in designing, overseeing, and launching facets of the Mobility Fund Phase II challenge process. He earned his law degree from George Washington University Law School and his bachelor’s degree from Brandeis University.