Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai recently announced a couple of changes to the Lifeline program, which supplies phone and broadband services to people without the income to pay for them. Since his appointment in 2017, the former commissioner has worked to reduce costs while phasing out support for voice-only options in favor of high-speed Internet. The changes are simple: Starting Dec. 1, Lifeline’s mobile carriers will have to offer 4.5 GB of data each month, up from 3 GB. This has extra urgency now, as the COVID-19 pandemic has driven unemployment to levels not seen since the Great Depression. The announcement sent shock waves from corporate boardrooms to nonprofits that serve asset-limited people. Public interest groups fear the impasse, if left unresolved, could undermine the premise of the 35-year-old program, which is to “ensure that all Americans have the opportunities and security that phone service brings, including being able to connect to jobs, family and emergency services,” as the FCC describes Lifeline. 

Here’s the problem: Lifeline is based on the $9.25 subsidy it provides each month to qualifying customers, those who receive federal help through Medicaid, Tribal Head Start, Federal Public Housing Assistance or similar programs, or can show earnings of less than 135% of the poverty line. The $9.25 rate hasn’t changed since 2016, when Lifeline’s minimum service standards (MSS) were created. That’s a deal-breaker for service providers.

All it takes is a nationwide crisis to underline the most glaring equity issues our society faces. The one that has captured my attention during COVID-19 is the chronic lack of home internet access for people of color, low-income households, and rural residents. That lack of access puts schools in an especially difficult position as they expand their use of technology during the pandemic, and beyond. It's important to remember that this technology challenge has been staring us in the face for decades. It is not just a COVID-19 issue—it is a civil rights issue of the utmost importance.

To ignore the digital divide, and the generation of students suffering as a result, is to uphold the boundaries of race and class that keep American society hostile to tens of millions of its people. To tackle it head-on is to imagine how much better America could be if internet access were no longer a luxury afforded only to those who have inherited its privilege. No longer would schools have to bend over backward for students who want to learn at home but don't have the means. No longer would a person's ability to safely access learning opportunities, and the life circumstances they facilitate, be contingent on their means and the color of their skin.

The Federal Communications Commission's top priority is closing the digital divide. In its latest inquiry into broadband deployment, the FCC asks how successful its efforts have been. Congress requires the FCC to determine each year if broadband is reaching all Americans in a timely fashion. For the past three years, the FCC's Republican majority, relying on its faulty data, has concluded that broadband is being deployed to all Americans on a reasonable and timely basis. Will it do so again? Benton collects news on universal broadband every day for our Headlines newsletter. During the COVID-19 national emergency, we've featured article after article about how stay-at-home orders have impacted people. For people with robust residential broadband service, lockdowns may have been somewhat bearable. For people without reliable broadband, the pandemic has been devastating. We quickly review what we've been reading over the last six months, in hopes we get a sense of how close we are to ensuring that affordable broadband reaches everyone in America. Without accurate broadband data, perhaps a survey of reporting from communities across the country can help us answer the question.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and nearly 40 other senators are pressing the Federal Communications Commission to take action on the learning gap, urging FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to allow broadband connection into students' homes by expanding the E-Rate Program, which helps schools and libraries connect to the internet. "The FCC has the power to help mitigate the impact of the coronavirus on our most vulnerable families," they wrote. "We now urge you in the strongest possible terms to utilize this authority to provide internet connectivity and devices for children in need." Chairman Pai has argued that the program is specifically for classrooms, not students' homes. "We always have the discretion to waive our rules, for good cause shown," Chairman Pai said during a June congressional hearing. "But we can't waive a statute." Chairman Pai said that "the statute says specifically that services to classrooms is what the FCC can support through the E rate program." But Sen Van Hollen argued that the FCC has the ability to expand the program without permission from Congress.

As anchors of the community, upgraded broadband infrastructure will help Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) serve the needs of unserved and underserved communities that are too often overlooked or ignored. That is why it is imperative to invest in HBCUs in the digital age by (1) expanding access to broadband for students, faculty, and staff on and off campus and (2) creating opportunities to recruit and retain HBCU students and alumni in the technology and telecommunications sectors. The COVID-19 pandemic has reminded us that access to affordable, reliable broadband is necessary to participate in modern life. It is the tool that we use to access educational platforms, create businesses, and remain connected to loved ones, no matter the distance. Despite the necessity of this tool, millions of Americans lack access to broadband, largely people of color, rural areas, and low-income populations. In HBCU communities, many of which are concentrated in the South, geographic location and income inequality compounds the impact of the digital divide.

A host of companies, are challenging the way Apple runs its App Store. The App Store generates at least $15 billion in annual sales for the tech giant. Critics say Apple takes too big a cut of app makers’ sales and wields monopoly power over the gateway that connects hundreds of millions of users to mobile apps. Apple disputes that characterization, saying that it collects only a portion of sales from a small percentage of the almost 2 million apps available on the App Store and that its practices are in line with competitors’ app marketplaces. Here is an overview of recent challenges to the App Store model and what they mean for consumers and the company (fee skirmishes, competition, etc).