NTCA - The Rural Broadband Association, in partnership with several rural stakeholders, sent a letter to members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees in support of sufficient 2026 funding for the telecommunications programs overseen by the Rural Utilities Service within the Department of Agriculture. The organizations wrote, "Congress’s continued support for funding RUS telecommunications and broadband programs remains vital. A strong public-private partnership is essential to America’s quest to secure and maintain global broadband preeminence. Given our shared interest in ensuring the long-term success and well-being of rural America, and in light of the positive return for the national budget arising out of the agency’s lending efforts at a time when budgetary pressures are significant, it is our hope you will maintain support for RUS’ telecommunications programs." The letter also notes that, "Not only do the funding programs administered by RUS help rural America get connected, but the agency’s telecommunications and broadband program loans must be paid back with interest—creating a win-win situation for rural consumers and American taxpayers."

Imagine being told that your state government has the funds to give your family an affordable high-speed Internet connection—not just this year, but every year for the next two centuries. Now, imagine that same government decides instead to run a fiber optic cable to a single house at the end of a long rural road. This is not a thought experiment. It’s the real tradeoff now playing out across the country under the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. And here’s the kicker: Affordability—not lack of infrastructure—is a much bigger reason people are offline. If we’re serious about closing the digital divide, we have to stop confusing infrastructure with access. The fastest rural fiber network in the world does nothing for a low-income mother in a city apartment if she can’t afford to connect. A pristine fiber line to a country mansion means little to an elderly veteran in the suburbs who doesn’t know how to log on to the network that was already built in his area. BEAD has the potential to close that divide. But if we let ideology and fiber purism guide how we spend these billions, we may end up with miles of fiber and most unconnected people still left offline. 

[Joe Kane is Information Technology and Innovation Foundation’s director for broadband and spectrum policy.]

Despite dark money campaigns fighting a community network in Bountiful, Utah, the project has now been successfully completed by Utopia Fiber, and customers are signing up. Roger Timmerman, executive director of Utopia Fiber, said, “We have completed the Bountiful City fiber project and built out the entire city with an open access network. This was a three-year project, and we completed it nearly a full year ahead of schedule.” The fiber network now passes 16,500 addresses, but the project faced initial challenges. When the project was being considered, dark money groups fought against it. A dark money group called Utah Taxpayers Association financed a petition effort to force a vote on project funding. It hired signature collectors to try to persuade registered voters to oppose the project. Although these dark money groups don’t disclose their donors, one can only assume that they were funded by the incumbent providers in Bountiful, which include Comcast and CenturyLink. However, there is no verification of exactly who was behind the campaigns.

In an increasingly connected world, the ability to participate in civic life often depends on reliable internet access and digital skills. From voting to community organizing, digital inclusion—ensuring everyone has the technology, connectivity, and skills they need—is essential for building a more inclusive and engaged society. 

• Empowering Voters and Strengthening Democracy: Voting is one of the most significant ways individuals can engage in civic life, but the digital divide can lead to disenfranchisement. Online voter registration, locating polling places, and accessing information about candidates and issues all require internet access. Digital inclusion ensures that every eligible voter has the tools they need to participate in democracy, regardless of their socioeconomic status. 
• Supporting Grassroots Movements and Community Organizing: Grassroots movements, gatherings, and volunteer opportunities are often organized and promoted through digital platforms. Individuals without internet access or digital literacy miss out on these opportunities to connect, organize, and make their voices heard. Digital inclusion enables more inclusive participation in community events, amplifying diverse perspectives and the exchange of ideas, which helps foster collective action. 
• Enabling Virtual Civic Engagement: The pandemic highlighted the importance of virtual spaces for civic participation. From town hall meetings to public forums, many community events have moved online, creating new opportunities for involvement. However, for individuals without reliable internet or devices, these spaces are inaccessible, silencing their voices in important conversations. Digital inclusion ensures that everyone has a seat at the (virtual) table, making civic dialogue more representative and effective.

The Association of State Democratic Committees, the group responsible for overseeing Democratic Party state efforts, is strongly encouraging all its state campaigns to use a single digital ad tech platform from a company called TargetSmart. The move aims to help Democrats streamline their ad buys and save money, but some critics say the one-vendor mandate is anticompetitive and limits innovation. TargetSmart has been one of the leading voter data sources for Democratic political parties and progressive organizations since it launched in 2006. The company provides services to the Democratic National Committee to enhance their voter file. TargetSmart also operates a demand-side platform (DSP) that allows its to buy and place digital ads on behalf of customers in a programmatic, or automated, fashion. Its ad-buying platform sits on top of its proprietary voter file. The firm is privately owned by its cofounders, Drew Brighton and Jeff Ferguson.

Like any liberal on Fox News, Federal Communications Commissioner Anna Gomez finds herself outnumbered. But that hasn’t stopped the Democratic appointee to the FCC from publicly speaking out about “sham investigations” and what she calls the weaponizing of the commission to serve the interests of President Trump. Commissioner Gomez recently took her efforts to combat the FCC’s actions and support press freedom to Los Angeles. A May 28 event sponsored by the advocacy group Free Press marked the first stop outside of Washington in a “First Amendment Listening Tour” Gomez is conducting to call attention to the Trump administration’s hostility toward mainstream media. After the panel, the Commissioner struck a realistic note about what she can hope to accomplish as the soon-to-be lone Democrat on the five-member body, with Commissioner Geoffrey Starks having announced that he’ll formally depart later in June. “I do work with my fellow commissioners and try to add value, and where I can agree, I will,” she said. “But if not, I’m going to speak out. So this is my role.”