While the recent COVID-response programs are welcomed additions to the effort to connect all people, they are only one part of the total ecosystem required to achieve universal service. The Universal Service Fund continues to be an important part of that ecosystem. Specifically, the Lifeline program’s voice and data and voiceonly subsidies for consumers is not replicated elsewhere, and the Emergency Connectivity Fund program does not reach as far or cover as many needs as the E-rate program. One program does not serve all ends. That is why all of the programs that target vulnerable populations should work together to ensure that varying communication needs are met. For example, people may require voice access for 911 and mobile service for texting and communication on-the-go, robust broadband at home, well-connected schools and libraries, tools to reach K-12 schools as well as higher levels of education, devices, opportunities to learn about digital technology and more. None of the current programs can do all of those things, but all of them should integrate with each other to meet a range of needs.

The Rural Wireless Association noted that the Universal Service Fund is unsustainable as currently constructed. When the 1996 Telecommunications Act was signed into law, voice telecommunications ruled the day and was the primary service supported by the USF. Circumstances have since changed. An explosion of innovation pushed consumers to use more data and demand higher speeds and lower latency. This demand resulted in the need for more spectrum to keep up with the evolving networks and transformed the dominant means of communications from telecommunications voice connectivity to broadband data connectivity. With the passage of the Infrastructure Act that will fund even more broadband deployment across the nation, the USF will need to be able to quickly adapt to be able to support the provision of broadband service to high-cost areas that do not have enough population to create the revenue needed to sustain ongoing operations and maintenance.

RWA recommends three different strategies that the FCC could employ to both protect the sustainability of the USF and ensure that the FCC’s universal broadband goals are met.  First, the FCC should transition high-cost support for fixed broadband to ongoing support to maintain the networks that are deployed through the Infrastructure Act funds and through current high-cost programs that are set to conclude on or before 2028. Second, the FCC should develop a model-based support mechanism to enable and sustain 5G mobile networks to replace the reverse auction framework that has been proven to result in unsecure and subpar broadband networks. Third, the FCC should immediately move forward with reforming its USF contribution methodology to include broadband revenue as part of the contribution factor. In addition, RWA proposes that Congress consider legislation that collects a penny at the point of sale for every commercial transaction that takes place using broadband. One hundred trillion commercial transactions would equate to $1 trillion.  This money could be used not only for further infrastructure reform and development, but could also be used to bring down the national debt and lower taxes. 

A group of rural Michigan advocates are urging state lawmakers to fund and staff the Michigan High-Speed Internet Office. Gov Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) created the office in June 2021 with the aim of expanding broadband internet access to more residents. But the office as yet has no budget and therefore no full-time staff. "We need the Michigan legislature to act and approve the funding and full-time employees as requested by the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity for our Michigan High-Speed Internet Office," said Joanne Galloway, executive director of the Center for Change Northern Michigan Advocacy. "I'm advocating for funding and full-time staff for the Michigan High-Speed Internet Office," said Levi Teitel, rural communications coordinator for Progress Michigan. "All 50 states are receiving lots of federal funding for broadband development. Our neighboring states already have staff in place in offices. We're going to be competing with others all across this country for access to all of the supplies to do construction (of internet infrastructure) and all of the labor force," said Galloway. Broadband service has expanded rapidly in recent years in some parts of Michigan, but the state's most rural areas still have limited access. That puts farmers, students and businesses at a disadvantage to their competitors in places with faster access. "The need is dire," said Gary Wellnitz, northern Michigan field representative for the American Federation of Teachers — Michigan.