Amid the homebound social isolation of the coronavirus, society as a whole has never had so stark a reminder of why broadband matters and what life looks like for those who lack access. With that in mind, Government Technology recently spoke with experts, advocates and those working on broadband initiatives in both state and local government. What emerged is a picture of a resurging interest in closing the digital divide, as well as a host of predictions and suggestions around fast-tracking efforts. “What this public health crisis underscores is that broadband is critical infrastructure,” said Kathryn de Wit, manager of Pew Charitable Trusts’ Broadband Research Initiative. “It’s foundational technology to so many things that we in today’s economy rely on every day.”

While others have seen a reinvigoration in interest at lower levels of government, Benton Senior Fellow and Public Advocate Gigi Sohn said it has also recharged the question of whether broadband should be regulated in the same way the government does utilities like phone service. “Will this reinvigorate the question of whether broadband is a utility?” Sohn said. “It already has.” Sohn said it is important for the federal government to regain its ability to regulate broadband, otherwise a service that is “inextricably linked with the public interest” is liable to be dictated to the actions and needs of large private companies.

The solutions enacted by the Federal Communications Commission and increased funding for hotspots are commendable but insufficient. The tens of millions of American families on the wrong side of the digital divide deserve more than temporary funding for temporary fixes. People on the wrong side of the divide — often immigrants, elderly and low-income families with children — are further marginalized when they have no or intermittent access to broadband. Fortunately, there is a solution. The FCC’s Lifeline program provides funding for connecting low-income families to telecommunications technologies. The program provides subsidies for traditional telephone service, mobile service or limited broadband service (one per household). It badly needs modernization and increased funding. Modernization and adequate funding of Lifeline would provide a much-needed comprehensive and permanent solution for the tens of millions of Americans on the wrong side of the digital divide. The next stimulus bill should provide funding for short-term connectivity and fund a modernized Lifeline program so our nation won’t need to resort to short-term or temporary fixes in the event of a future crisis.

[Larry Irving is a former U.S. assistant secretary of commerce]

Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced a new streamlined process for providing states funding flexibilities to best meet the needs of students and educators during the COVID-19 national emergency. The new flexibilities, authorized under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, allow schools to repurpose existing K-12 education funds for technology infrastructure and teacher training on distance learning, among other flexibilities to move resources to areas of highest need during the national emergency. The CARES Act, signed into law by President DonaldTrump on March 27, now allows states and school districts to devote more of their federal resources to technology infrastructure to support distance learning for students and for professional development for teachers who are teaching remotely, many for the first time. By providing a streamlined process to obtain funding flexibilities, states will be able to quickly make decisions to meet the needs of their students.

One of the flexibilities includes removing the 15% cap on spending Title IV Part A funds on technology infrastructure. The Title IV Part A funds can be used for mobile hotspots and data plans.

Internet providers stepping up in the midst of this crisis to maintain affordable service is the right thing to do in this moment—but it’s a short-term fix for a decades-long problem. To truly close the digital divide, cities and states (and Congress if needed) should follow the playbook from the 1930s, and from the many communities—red and blue, urban and rural—who have brought high-speed internet to all residents:

• Get Local: Today, more than 500 communities across the country have some type of publicly owned broadband network, and more than 230 communities across 33 states have a publicly owned network offering at least one gigabit service. 
• Change Laws that Block Local Action: It is an outrage that not every community even has the choice to provide a public option. Today, 19 states have legal barriers or even full prohibitions against municipal broadband networks, as a result of intense lobbying of state legislatures by existing private internet service providers. 
• Get Congress to Act: Congress could strengthen the authority of the Federal Communications Commission to back communities in states with barriers to public broadband networks. Secondly, Congress could undertake legislation, like the Rural Electrification Act, that provides financial incentives, such as low-cost loans, to communities to build their own networks, and close the divide in ways that are fitting for their unique geography and population.

[Ben Hecht is the CEO of Living Cities, a collaborative of 18 of the world’s largest philanthropic and financial institutions seeking to close racial income and wealth gaps.]

The Federal Communications Commission’s Office of General Counsel and Media Bureau wholly rejected a petition by Free Press demanding a government investigation into broadcasters that have aired statements by the President of the United States during White House Coronavirus Task Force briefings and related commentary regarding the coronavirus pandemic by other on-air personalities. The letter order notes that Free Press’ petition seeks remedies that would dangerously curtail the freedom of the press embodied in the First Amendment and misconstrues the FCC’s rules. The decision also makes clear that the FCC will neither act as a roving arbiter of broadcasters’ editorial judgments nor discourage them from airing breaking news events involving government officials in the midst of the current global pandemic.

In short, the FCC will not second-guess broadcasters (much less deploy the formal investigative power of the state against them) that are serving a critical function in providing the public comprehensive coverage of the current public health crisis and the government’s response. The FCC leaves to the press its time-honored and constitutionally protected role in testing the claims made by our political leaders—as well as those made by national advocacy organizations.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai issued the following statement on President Donald Trump’s Executive Order on Establishing the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the USTelecommunications Services Sector: “I applaud the President for formalizing Team Telecom review and establishing a process that will allow the Executive Branch to provide its expert input to the FCC in a timely manner. Now that this Executive Order has been issued, the FCC will move forward to conclude our own pending rulemaking on reform of the foreign ownership review process. As we demonstrated last year in rejecting the China Mobile application, this FCC will not hesitate to act to protect our networks from foreign threats. At the same time, we welcome beneficial investment in our networks and believe that this Executive Order will allow us to process such applications more quickly.”

FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly said, "I am exceptionally pleased by President Trump’s release of an Executive Order setting forth official procedures for administrative agencies to review and comment on FCC applications involving foreign ownership of communications companies, previously referred to as ‘Team Telecom.’ While all of our hearts and minds are properly focused on the COVID-19 pandemic, this EO will facilitate acceptable investment of foreign capital in the communications sector to help jump start the industry and our economy, when that time comes. Having been at the forefront of this multiyear reform effort, my priority has always been about fixing the incoherent and indefensibly unpredictable review process — one that reached new levels of disfunction during the Obama Administration — without jeopardizing national security in any manner. The new EO accomplishes this necessary balance by, among other things, establishing a formal structure to be known as the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector and by including deadlines for the relevant agencies to render decisions while still affording ample time for appropriate and thorough reviews. I will request that Chairman Pai move expeditiously to integrate the new Executive Order into our review process.”

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said, "President Trump’s decision sends a clear message that the US will do what it takes to secure our communications networks from any threats posed by foreign actors. By issuing this Executive Order, the President acted to ensure the security of our telecom networks against foreign actors who may seek to do us harm—and the timing could not have been better. The threats of attacks on our critical telecom infrastructure and illegal spying rise as our reliance on those networks rises. Leveraging America’s national security agencies and their expertise will enhance the Commission’s long-standing duty to help safeguard our networks. The President’s committee will have a full docket, and near the top of it, I recommend that the committee examine every carrier owned by the Chinese government that now connects to networks here in the US—including China Unicom and China Telecom. The committee’s focus on whether their existing ‘Section 214’ authorizations should be revoked would aid the Commission’s ongoing work on national security matters.”