Thursday, May 15, 2025
Headlines Daily Digest
The Digital Equity Act: What It Is and Why We Need It
Don't Miss:
Trump called a high-speed internet program a handout ‘based on race’ and ‘illegal.’ That’s False.
Broadband Funding







Broadband Pricing

State/Local


Platforms/Social Media/AI





Education

Transportation

Journalism


Research

Devices

Nonprofits

FCC Reform


Policymakers



Stories From Abroad

Company/Industry News



President Donald Trump called a Biden-era law to expand high-speed internet access "racist" and "illegal." We asked the White House and federal departments involved in the program for evidence to support Trump’s statement and received no reply. Although Trump referred to the law as "illegal," organizations familiar with it said they are unaware of any court challenges to it. The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, a nonprofit organization whose goal is to bring affordable broadband to everyone, wrote that President Trump cannot declare the law unconstitutional: "That is the sole purview of the courts. The Administration’s responsibility is to implement the law as written." Under the law, every state received money to write digital equity plans describing in detail how they planned to expand broadband access. The Trump administration sent letters May 9 to states and organizations terminating grants. Trump’s direction to cancel a program approved by Congress will likely face a court challenge. The act says high-speed internet expansion should benefit several groups in addition to racial minorities, including veterans, older Americans and rural residents. "The truth is, equity is not just for communities of color," Zaki Barzinji, senior director at Aspen Digital, which is part of the Aspen Institute, told GovTech.com. "It's not just for urban city communities. It's also for rural communities. It's for mostly white communities."

On Friday, May 9, 2025, the Trump Administration began notifying states that their Digital Equity Act Capacity Grant funds were terminated. The day prior, President Donald Trump shared via Truth Social that he and U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick are determined to bring an end to the Digital Equity Act and its “unconstitutional” and “illegal” programs. In 2021, Congress included the Digital Equity Act in the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to give U.S. states, territories, and Tribal entities the tools they need to help people get online and use the internet. These governments have completed their plans and, until May 9th, were preparing to implement programs to improve digital literacy, access to affordable internet-connected devices, provide technical support, and increase awareness of privacy and cybersecurity. The digital divide is multifaceted. Some 24 million people in the U.S. lack high-speed internet service in their homes, according to the Federal Communications Commission. Many households can’t afford service when it is available. And many millions have not adopted broadband because they lack the skills and/or devices to do so. The Digital Equity Act primarily aims to address these issues around broadband adoption.

The House Commerce Committee rejected an amendment to revive the Affordable Connectivity Program, with funds coming from proceeds from future Federal Communications Commission spectrum auctions. Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY), sponsor of the amendment, was not specific about the amount of money she wanted in describing her amendment, which was defeated (24 yeas, 29 nays) in a party line vote. “Funding to make broadband affordable is needed now, perhaps more than ever,” Rep. Clarke said. “[Auction] proceeds should be reinvested for the public good and not used exclusively to pay for tax cuts for [Republicans’] billionaire friends.”

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) granted a limited waiver of the support reduction schedule for certain recipients of Connect America Fund (CAF) high-cost support that missed the July 1, 2024 network performance testing certification deadline. The Bureau finds good cause to consider a carrier to have certified its network performance testing based on when it contacted the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) about its certification. Specifically, for carriers that contacted USAC prior to the July 1, 2024 deadline, the FCC waives the certification deadline if the carrier clearly communicated that it did not have data to submit for certain quarters or if it notified USAC that it had technical difficulties testing or with the USAC system. For carriers that contacted USAC after the July 1, 2024 deadline, the FCC will consider the date the carrier contacted or responded to USAC as the certification date. The FCC will consider carriers that had no subscribers to test to have timely certified their network performance testing.

The most recent White House Budget proposes eliminating the ReConnect grant program, which is administered by the Rural Utilities Service, a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. ReConnect has been a popular funding program in rural areas and was one of the few sources of federal broadband grants when it began. It is an interesting program because awards include both grants and low-interest rate loans. Congress purposefully put the ReConnect program at the RUS. The agency has been making loans for rural communications infrastructure since 1949. There is no guarantee that asking for the elimination of ReConnect in a budget means this is a done deal. But there is some sense in consolidating the federal effort focused on rural broadband. If this comes to pass, I’ll be a little sad that the folks who have been doing this since 1949 might not be the ones to help finish the job.

This study examines the offerings of 21 broadband providers across four U.S. cities (Boston, Kansas City, Minneapolis, and Seattle) to assess trends in consumer broadband pricing and availability. The objectives were: (1) to understand the expected cost of home broadband service in the United States and how this varied across different user classes, (2) to evaluate how these trends vary across the country’s cities and regions, and (3) to assess the availability of super high-speed plans across providers. Key findings include:
- 500Mbps is increasingly becoming the entry-level speed; however, 1 and 2 Gbps still command a price premium
- Some differences exist between operators, but similar pricing dynamics were present across all four cities

In 2024, West Virginia officials celebrated getting a jump toward improving broadband connectivity after the state became one of the first three approved to unlock millions of federal dollars. Now state officials are expressing frustration over federal delays. “It’s a digital inequity that we have in our state,” Sen Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) said in a briefing with reporters, saying the $1.2 billion allocated for West Virginia broadband “should have been out the door; it’s not.” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced recently that Commerce would undertake a “rigorous review” of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program, part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. West Virginia officials had believed the state was within striking distance of the real benefits of the broadband support. During a meeting of the West Virginia Broadband Enhancement Council, members reaffirmed support for fiber deployment to enhance broadband access, expressing concern over the BEAD program’s pause since March 5. The council unanimously approved a resolution saying a lengthy delay with respect to West Virginia is unnecessary because the state completed the comprehensive BEAD application process well before the deadline.

Communications Workers of America in Ohio are speaking out against using federal dollars to subsidize satellite Internet providers like Elon Musk’s Starlink. "Satellite Internet service is a terrible use of public funds,” said the CWA in their signed petitions to Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is planning to make changes to the $42.45 Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program, with some betting he will require states to spend less on fiber and more on satellite broadband to close the digital divide.
GLAAD's Social Media Safety Index Unveils How Tech Companies Intentionally Rolled Back Safety Policies for LGBTQ People

GLAAD, the world’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer media advocacy organization announced the findings of its fifth annual Social Media Safety Index, an annual report on LGBTQ safety, privacy, and expression. The in-depth report analyzes six major social media platforms—TikTok, YouTube, X, and Meta’s Facebook, Instagram, and Threads—across 14 indicators, which address a range of issues affecting LGBTQ people online, including data privacy, moderation transparency, training of content moderators, and workforce diversity. The report found that recent, unprecedented hate speech policy rollbacks from Meta and YouTube are actively undermining the safety of LGBTQ people and other historically marginalized groups, both online and offline. Alarming 2025 platform policy changes include YouTube’s removal of gender identity as a protected characteristic in its hate speech policy, and Meta’s wide-ranging rollbacks, including new exceptions expressly allowing hate speech, such as stating that LGBTQ people are “abnormal” and “mentally ill.” Out of a possible 100, the platforms received the following scores:
- TikTok: 56/100
- Facebook: 45/100
- Instagram: 45/100
- YouTube: 41/100
- Threads: 40/100
- X: 30/100

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr announced initial findings and anticipated savings resulting from a top-to-bottom review of agency contracts. The FCC has undertaken this review consistent with President Trump’s Executive Order 14222, “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Cost Efficiency Initiative.” The FCC’s initial work has reviewed contracts with a focus on identifying areas of redundancy and overspending. To support this effort, the FCC stood up an internal DOGE team composed of FCC staff and coordinated with the government’s DOGE representatives. Through a combination of scaling down and terminating contracts, the FCC has reduced the total contract ceiling value by more than $567 million. This figure represents cumulative savings from eliminating spending authorization under numerous contracts over multiple years. In the near term, the elimination or modification of contracts has generated more than $6.7 million in savings for the remainder of 2025 from the cancellation of obligated spending. In addition, this effort has also generated more than $21.1 million in savings for 2026, effectively reducing planned contract spending for 2026 by 20 percent. Contract cancellations and modifications thus far have included a wide range of agency work. Specifically, the review resulted in savings and efficiencies from the elimination or reduction of contracts for redundant or duplicative IT services, lightly used periodicals and press, unnecessary hog trapping services, tasks more efficiently done in-house, IT licenses exceeding the number of active users, and projects completed ahead of schedule or without exhausting the planned budget, among other circumstances. This review effort remains ongoing. More broadly, the Commission is working to improve agency efficiency by removing unnecessary rules and regulations. Its “In Re: Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative seeks to identify outdated and overly burdensome regulations that should be repealed. Its dormant docket proceeding seeks to terminate over 2,000 official proceedings that have become dormant and no longer serve a purpose for the American people.

Whatever notions one may have entertained in the past—or may still entertain—regarding the Federal Communications Commission as a so-called “independent” agency, it’s obvious that those notions may not hold true much longer. To be clear, the FCC’s supposed independence rests primarily on the claim that the agency’s commissioners may not be removed by the president without good cause and, as the Supreme Court put it in its landmark Humphrey’s Executor v. FTC (1935) decision regarding Federal Trade Commission commissioners, that they are “free from executive control. In her oft-cited Presidential Administration law review article published in 2001, then-Harvard Law School Dean and now-Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan declared that the lack of presidential removal power of the heads of independent agencies, as opposed to the heads of executive branch ones, is “the core legal difference between these entities.” If the president may lawfully remove commissioners of the FCC for any reason or no reason—in other words, at will—it’s difficult to maintain that the agencies are “independent” in any meaningful sense. And if this proves to be the case, it will be advisable, if not necessary, to begin considering whether and how the FCC should be structured in this brave new administrative law world.
[Randolph May is Founder and President of the Free State Foundation. ]
Benton (www.benton.org) provides the only free, reliable, and non-partisan daily digest that curates and distributes news related to universal broadband, while connecting communications, democracy, and public interest issues. Posted Monday through Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments, policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are factually accurate, their sometimes informal tone may not always represent the tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang (headlines AT benton DOT org), Grace Tepper (grace AT benton DOT org), and Zoe Walker (zwalker AT benton DOT org) — we welcome your comments.
© Benton Institute for Broadband & Society 2025. Redistribution of this email publication — both internally and externally — is encouraged if it includes this message. For subscribe/unsubscribe info email: headlines AT benton DOT org
Kevin Taglang
Executive Editor, Communications-related Headlines
Benton Institute
for Broadband & Society
1041 Ridge Rd, Unit 214
Wilmette, IL 60091
847-220-4531
headlines AT benton DOT org

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society All Rights Reserved © 2024


