Home » Community Networks »Consumer News »Public Policy & Gov't »Rural Broadband » Currently Reading:

Democrats Propose $40 Billion in “Last Mile” Rural Broadband Funding

Phillip Dampier March 8, 2018 Community Networks, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't, Rural Broadband 9 Comments

The Democrats are countering the Trump Administration’s economic proposals with plans of their own they broadly call “A Better Deal.”

Democrats in Washington are countering President Donald Trump’s lack of commitment to earmark funding for rural broadband with a $40 billion plan of their own that is part of a broader trillion-dollar infrastructure investment package released Wednesday.

The plan, “Returning the Republican Tax Giveaways for the Wealthy to the American People,” specifically targets funding for a new, last-mile focused, broadband expansion program that would target funding specifically to providing broadband service to the homes and businesses in the country that cannot get the service now.

“The electricity of 2017 is high-speed Internet,” according to the Democrats. “While the private sector has delivered high-speed internet to many, millions of Americans in less profitable rural and urban areas have been left out.”

Rural broadband is expected to become a campaign issue in the midterm elections, as Democrats push their new working and middle class recovery program they call “A Better Deal,” reminiscent of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” program during the Depression of the 1930s.

The Democrats claim they will do a better job overcoming the digital divide by forcing providers to compete for public funding. In contrast, the Trump Administration’s general infrastructure program offered $200 billion for all types of infrastructure projects, with no funding earmarked for broadband. But most of that money can only be unlocked if a private company enters into a public-private partnership with the government and agrees to invest even more in private dollars than the federal government will offer in supplementary funding.

The Democrats also claim their broadband investment program will be open to public providers like municipalities, co-ops, and publicly owned utilities, not just private companies. The Republicans have generally opposed municipal broadband projects, although there are some exceptions in rural areas where local and state officials share the frustration of bypassed local residents.

Manchin

“If you actually get out to Trump country and talk to folks, you will discover that they are angry and frustrated and pissed off that the companies won’t serve them (because it is too expensive to provide service) and won’t let them deploy their own networks,” wrote Harold Feld, senior vice president at the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge, in a Facebook post this week. “Traditionally, rural Republicans have been eager to use the tools of government to bring essential services to rural America. If this helps pressure rural Republicans to break with the anti-government mantra and return to traditional bipartisan approaches to bringing service to rural America, so much the better.”

Moderate Democrats in states with large rural populations are especially excited by the Democratic plan.

“The way we speak in plain-speaking West Virginia, this is a really good deal,” said Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.V.) at a news conference Thursday. “All of you who’ve come from urban areas, you take this for granted.”

The rural broadband funding is part of a much larger $1 trillion investment package paid for by reversing certain tax breaks. The corporate tax rate, which was slashed from 35 percent to 21 percent under the Republican plan, would be raised to 25 percent under the Democratic plan. Democrats are also seeking to restore estate taxes on couples earning over $11 million annually.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
EJ
EJ
6 years ago

We will see if this is offered to EVERYONE and not just the local large teleco On top of it we need to also address under-serviced smaller cities. EVERYONE should have the opportunity; that includes the wireless industry, cable companies, Co-op, satellite and yes even municipal. All should have equal footing and an opportunity to bring affordable and adequate broadband to all. We shall see how free from influence the “Democrats” really are. I have my doubts.

kaniki
kaniki
6 years ago
Reply to  EJ

I looked it up, and only 6% of the population does not have access to high speed internet.. But personally, I think what is a bigger problem is, being able to afford it. No matter how many people have access to it, it means nothing if they can not get it hooked up. It is like where I live. I have high speed, but am going to have to drop it at the end of the month because I can not afford it any more. I am living off of disability.. Most people I know living off of SS or… Read more »

Limboaz
Limboaz
6 years ago

Why does everything the Democrats do seem so contrived and hyper partisan? We finally got our corporate rate down to a competitive level that compares well to every other developed nation, and they can’t leave well enough alone.

kaniki
kaniki
6 years ago
Reply to  Limboaz

It is in name only.. They say things like, but it is bipartisan, to make them look good.. and then when things fail, it gives them a way to blame others for its failure. Look at the ACA.. That is a good example.. It was written in a way, that it could NOT be sustained as intended.. and when I say intended, it was originally intended to be self supported.. That failed miserably.. Now things are going crazy with it, and they are blaming Trump, and the Republicans for its failure.. Notice how it was “bipartisan” and yet, it was… Read more »

kaniki
kaniki
6 years ago

Wow.. That leaves so much to be desired, that it is not even funny.. Rural Republicans are… I love how they leave out the Democrats there. Ironic how they talk like they have all the answers now that a Republican is in office.. Yet, they did NOTHING to fix this with 8 years in office before now.. Hmm.. Not only that, but they talk like they are the “fix all’s” of the internet.. But lets look at things realistically. No matter how much you put the ability to get it there, it means nothing if you can not afford it.… Read more »

EJ
EJ
6 years ago

Corporate rate down, but left most the loop holes wide open (don’t forget that). As for the Democrats they are nothing more then Republican lite when it comes to the base of the party. You aren’t going to see anything new until something new comes along. If you want something with substance my suggestion is vote third party whether it be progressive democrat (true progressive not neoliberal), the soon to be formed true labor party, green party, independent, or libertarian. All of these parties have something to prove so you can bet they will bring it to the best of… Read more »

kaniki
kaniki
6 years ago
Reply to  EJ

Left most loop holes wide open?? and you expected them to close them?? If they did, it would hurt them, and they are too greedy for that.. As for the third party thing.. It depends on the candidate.. Bernie Sanders was a 3rd party, turn democrat, and while I did like some stuff about him.. I completely lost all respect of him when he started cow tailing to people. Look at when the BLM group came up on his stage.. Instead of having them escorted off, he backed down, and stopped his rally. I can understand standing up for what… Read more »

EJ
EJ
6 years ago

Actually it was screwed up by Bill Clinton era if you want to get technical. You blamed the wrong supposed Democrat kaniki. I shouldn’t say it is solely on him, but he did crack the door open for abuse. Without the deregulation of phone the logic thing probably would of happened. Internet would of fell into some sort of regulation.

kaniki
kaniki
6 years ago
Reply to  EJ

I did not mean it as it was one person, or anothers fault, but more like, they are sitting there talking about Republicans are… while this stuff happened strictly under Democratic rule.. So in essence, they have no room to talk.. Yes, stuff did happen under Clinton, but, the fact is, that merger.. or maybe I should say take over, was done strictly under Obama.. He had the power back then, that if he wanted to stop it, he could have. Just like how they stopped T-Mobile from combining with sprint, and such.. The same could be said for the… Read more »

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!