State Broadband Regulation

The industry spends a lot of time focusing on potential federal broadband regulation, and bills introduced in Congress get a lot of press. It’s easy to forget that a lot of broadband legislation happens at the State level,

NCSL (the National Conference of State Legislators) tracks state legislation across the country and wrote an article summarizing state legislation related to broadband issues. 2025 was a busy year for broadband legislation, and there were over 600 broadband bills introduced in state legislatures, with 139 bills enacted into law. The article is a great resource for anybody who wants to dig deeper since it links to the enacted bills that are mentioned in the story.

Poles and Permitting

Seventy of the enacted laws established new state rules related to pole attachments and permitting. We’re likely to see a flurry of more laws in this area in 2026 since BEAD grant rules require states to approve or deny applications for permits on State highways and land be approved or denied within 90 days. The bills highlighted in the article include:

  • Idaho HB 180 requires public utilities to allow space on poles for broadband, cable and telecommunications equipment and allows the Idaho Public Utilities Commission to mediate if parties cannot agree on rates, conditions, and timing. The legislature thought this law was needed since municipal pole owners are excluded from federal pole attachment rules.
  • Indiana SB 502 adopts the timelines required by BEAD and also establishes a timeline for quick mediation of disputes.
  • Maine HB 559 gives more authority to towns over approving the building of new poles. The law allows smaller towns than previously to deny applications to build new poles as long as the reason for the rejection is related to public safety or welfare.
  • Colorado HB 1056 and West Virginia HB 3144 allows for automatic approval of specific kinds of applications for rights-of-way and permits for wireless infrastructure.

Critical Infrastructure Protections

There has been a major uptick in damage and vandalism to communications infrastructure in recent years that has resulted in serious network outages. State legislatures reacted to passing legislation that establishes or creates penalties for those who damage networks. I discussed this topic in several blogs this year, one that asks when network damage might be considered to be terrorism, and one that looks at the trend of declaring broadband networks to be critical infrastructure.

The article provides links to the text of approved legislation that have increased penalties for those who damage communication infrastructure, enacted by Alabama SB 54, Iowa HB 879, Kansas HB 2061, Kentucky SB 64, Louisiana SB 22, Montana HB 257, and West Virginia HB 3504. A few states went even further, and Oklahoma HB 2104 and Texas SB 1646 categorized damage to communications infrastructure as felonies.

Looking Ahead to 2026

It’s likely that there will also be a lot of new legislation in 2026. As mentioned above, States likely will tighten approval times for rights-of-way and permitting on state lands and highways to comply with BEAD. An area that is seeing a lot of discussion is data centers, and it seems likely that states will pass legislation that establishes rules related to the placement, energy use, and environmental issues related to new data centers. While not directly related to broadband, it seems likely that there will be a lot of new State regulations related to AI.

Is There a Fiber Crunch?

There have been a number of articles in the industry press predicting a major shortage of fiber in 2026. Fiber manufacturers have already been working at full capacity due to the large amounts of fiber networks being built. Telcos like AT&T, Frontier, Brightspeed, Windstream, Consolidated, and many others have been busy building fiber. The big cable companies like Comcast, Charter, and Cox have been building fiber. There are numerous fiber overbuilders like Lumos and Metronet, which were purchased by T-Mobile and numerous other companies funded by venture capital. By my math, there was also over $13 billion spent in 2025 to build fiber, funded by grants and subsidies like ARPA, Capital Project Funds, RDOF, ReConnect, EA-CAM, etc.

2026 should also be a busy year for fiber construction. The telcos, cable companies, and fiber overbuilders are all planning a lot of fiber construction. There is still a little over $10 billion in planned fiber construction funded by the same existing subsidy and grant programs, plus there will start to be orders for fiber from BEAD grants as the year goes by.

Fierce Network talked to the major fiber manufacturers like CommScope, Clearfield, Corning, and STL, and was told that the companies are seeing unprecedented demand to provide fiber for AI data centers. This demand comes from both inside new data centers and also for the networks that tie data centers together.

I think people will be surprised to hear the amount of fiber wiring needed inside an AI data center. The Fierce Network article quoted Rahul Puri, the CEO of the Optical Networking Business STL, as saying that an AI data center needs 36 times as much fiber wiring as a normal data center. Anybody who’s ever been in a traditional data center will be floored by that assertion since there are typically large amounts of fiber wiring either under the floors or overhead of racks in a traditional data center. A Fierce Network article in December said that the giant 1 million processor data center being built in Louisiana by Meta will require 8 million miles of individual strands of fiber. Most of these strands will be part of fiber bundles of hundreds to a thousand fibers. The data needed to connect processors is gigantic.

Corning and other vendors are working on new technologies that will provide the needed connectivity within a data center, such as co-packaged optics that place optics and electronics closer together. Other vendors like STL are investigating hollow-core fiber to increase density and decrease latency.

There is also a huge demand for middle-mile fiber to connect AI data centers. Research firm RVA LLC predicts that 92,000 new route miles of fiber will be needed to connect data centers over the next five years. These are also big fiber bundles. My firm worked on a data center proposal last year that didn’t come to fruition, where the data center builder wanted a 512-fiber backhaul network.

One of the biggest challenges for the vendors is that there are different kinds of fiber for different uses, like inside a data center, in middle-mile networks, in last-mile networks, for drops, and inside buildings. The challenge for vendors will be to match manufacturing output with demand.

Vendors and industry experts are predicting that some kinds of fiber could experience ordering backlogs as long as a year. Vendors are likely going to satisfy their largest customers first, so smaller projects might find themselves in a bind.

It will be ironic after all of the hurry up and wait for BEAD if grant projects are badly delayed due to a fiber supply chain problem. But all of the industry predictions are based upon demand staying firm. There  are a number of credible predictions that there will be an AI market contraction in the coming year since data center supply seems to have outstripped the ability to generate the revenues needed to make the industry viable.

The Fiber Broadband Association says it is not expecting big backlogs in the fiber needed to build last-mile networks. I guess none of us will know for sure until we start seeing smaller ISPs place orders for fiber later this year.

Charter to Offer Wireless Backup

Charter plans to leverage one of its competitive advantages and offer wireless backup to residential broadband customers. This service would mean an automatic rollover to cellular data any time Charter’s normal broadband connection goes down.

Charter started to offer this service to businesses during the pandemic in 2020. Charter charges businesses $20 per month for the service. Charter provides business customers using the service with a cellular modem that includes a SIM card. The modem includes up to eight hours of battery backup, meaning that it will kick in when customers lose power – and benefits customers who have backup power for their computers. Customers get unlimited usage while using the cellular network.

The cellular backup doesn’t provide a full-replacement backup. Speeds are going to be a lot slower than the broadband provided by Charter’s HFC network. Functions like static IP will likely not be connected through the wireless connection. The service will only work for customers who can receive a good cell signal from Charter. Charter has begun using some of its own cellular frequencies in parts of some markets, but Charter’s cell service is mostly provided using the Verizon network. I happen to be a Charter broadband customer, but I also live in a total dead zone for Verizon cellular, so this backup service wouldn’t work for me.

Charter’s announcement said that Charter would be offering this to residential customers on similar terms as for businesses. We don’t know yet if this also means $20 per month. This service will be of interest to those who are badly disadvantaged by broadband outages. This makes great sense for a retail store, for example, which might lose the ability to accept credit cards during a broadband outage. It seems likely that a business might benefit from the service even for one or two Charter outages per year.

I have to wonder who this will benefit in the residential market? I lose Charter broadband from time to time, and I always switch my computer to use data from my cellphone. The change takes a few minutes to restore broadband. What goes dark during a Charter outage is the TV and any other devices in our house that rely on broadband. While we have a ton of WiFi devices in the house, none of them are critical. For example, we don’t have smoke detectors or doorbell cameras that rely on WiFi. I imagine folks who rely on WiFi for such devices might be interested in the wireless backup service. Like most homes, I don’t have a backup generator for power outages, so this service wouldn’t give me any real benefit during a power outage.

The product does raise an interesting question. I live in a city where the vast majority of homes use either Charter or AT&T for home broadband. I have to think that any time that one of these ISPs has a broadband network crash, a lot of people switch to a cellular network. It’s hard to think that those networks don’t get super busy and slow down during broadband outages. The Charter service will drive even more people to the Verizon cellular network. Perhaps the cellular networks are more robust than I imagine, but it has to be burden when the cellular networks are suddenly inundated by a lot of normal home and business broadband customers using cellular data.

Falling FWA Speeds

Ookla recently published a report looking at broadband speeds being delivered with FWA cellular broadband offered by AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon.

The report includes the chart shown below that tracks the median download speeds of each carrier, by quarter, since the third quarter of 2023.

There are some interesting stories in the chart:

  • At the end of the third quarter of 2023, the median download speed was nearly the same for all three carriers, between 140 and 150 Mbps.
  • Since then, T-Mobile speeds have increased significantly, peaking at 221.7 Mbps at the end of the first quarter of 2025. T-Mobile’s median speeds are now twice the speeds of AT&T.
  • The Ookla blog talks about the fact that speed for all three carriers dropped from the second quarter of this year to the end of the third quarter. AT&T dropped from 114.3 Mbps to 104.6 Mbps. T-Mobile dropped from 221.7 Mbps to 209.1 Mbps. Verizon has the largest drop from 167.3 Mbps to 137.8 Mbps.

Ookla asks the question of why speeds dropped during those two quarters. They expect that some of the drop is due to foliage that slows down cellular signals from late fall until autumn. Foliage is clearly an issue in many parts of the country.

Ookla also asks the question if the networks are experiencing problems due to oversubscription. The three carriers have seen extraordinary growth. At the end of the third quarter of 2023 there were just under 7 million FWA customers. By the end of the third quarter of this year, the companies had just under 14.5 million customers, having added over 7.5 million FWA customers in two years.

It’s clear that FWA customers put a lot of stress on a cellular network. Assuming that FWA customers are the same as other broadband customers, the average U.S. broadband customer used over 640 gigabytes of broadband per month at the end of the third quarter, compared to 17 gigabytes for the average cellphone customer. From a bandwidth perspective, an FWA customer uses 38 times more cell site resources than a cellular customer.

The questions that Ookla is asking are not easily answered because FWA is not a homogeneous broadband product. Customers must be located near a tower to get the fastest speeds, and speeds drop off as the distance between customers and a tower increases. Consider AT&T, which has been using FWA as a replacement for DSL. This likely means AT&T is offering FWA to customers at a greater distance from towers than the other two carriers, in order to provide that copper alternative. That alone could contribute to AT&T’s lower median speeds.

The FWA market isn’t going to remain static. AT&T recently upgraded 23,000 cell sites with the 3.45 MHz spectrum the company acquired from EchoStar. That should cause a big upward spike in AT&T FWA speeds this quarter.

The Ookla report is fascinating. It will be interesting to watch the FWA speeds over time to better understand seasonality, foliage, and the impact of rapid customer growth.

World Internet Statistics December 2025

At the start of a new year, I thought it would be interesting to take a fresh look at the state of the Internet around the world. The following statistics come from the DataReportal Digital 2026 Global Overview Report.

Population. There are 8.25 billion people on the planet, up 69 million over the last year, an increase of 0.8%. 58.4% of people now live in an urban center. The overall literacy rate in the world is 87.4%.

Internet. The number of people using the Internet has grown to 6.04 billion, or 73.2% of the people on Earth. That number grew by 294 million in the last year, a growth rate of 5.1%. This means that 2.2 billion people still don’t have access to the Internet.

86.5% of urban residents around the world have access to the Internet, while only 54.5% of rural residents have access.

The countries with the lowest levels of Internet adoption are North Korea (<1%), Burundi (11.1%), Central African Republic (12.0%), South Sudan (13.2%), and Chad (13.2%).

The highest rate of Internet adoption is in northern Europe (97.7%), followed by western Europe (95.1%). The lowest adoption is in eastern Africa (26.0%) and central Africa (33.5%). North America is at 93.3%. 75.7% of men around the world have access to the Internet compared to 70.7% of women.

Worldwide median download broadband speeds have grown from 82.8 Mbps in August 2023 to 104.4 Mbps in August 2025.

The fastest median download speeds in the world are in Singapore (394.3 Mbps), Chile (347.4 Mbps), Hong Kong (332.7 Mbps), the United Arab Emirates (327.6 Mbps), and France (308.0 Mbps). The slowest median download speeds are in Syria (3.4 Mbps), Cuba (3.5 Mbps), Afghanistan (4.5 Mbps), Ethiopia (9.4 Mbps), and Libya (11.0 Mbps).

The average weekly time spent using broadband online per Internet user worldwide was 33 hours, 27 minutes.

Cell Coverage. There are 5.78 billion unique cellular users in the world, meaning that 70.1% of people have a cellphone. That number increased by 108 million during the last year, an annual growth rate of 1.9%. Ericsson says that 86.9% of phones in use are smartphones.

Worldwide median download cellular speeds have more than doubled in the last two years, from 43.2 Mbps in August 2023 to 90.7 Mbps in August 2025.

The fastest median download speeds in the world are in the United Arab Emirates (614.4 Mbps), Qatar (511.4 Mbps), Kuwait (414.6 Mbps), Brazil (289.4 Mbps), and South Korea (224.5 Mbps). The slowest median download cellular speeds are in Bolivia (14.7 Mbps), Belarus (18.6 Mbps), Eswatini (19.7 Mbps), Pakistan (24.3 Mbps), and Syria (24.7 Mbps).

Social Media. There are 5.66 billion users of social media, an increase of 259 million users and a growth rate of 4.8%.

The worldwide average time spent using social media is 18 hours 36 minutes per week.

The ten most widely used social media apps, in order, are YouTube, WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Messenger, SnapChat, Telegram, Pinterest, and Threads.

Devices. The devices used to access the Internet (as a percentage of total world users) are smartphones (93.7%), laptops or desktops (59.6%), connected televisions (31.6%), and tablets (28.0%).

The percentage of worldwide broadband traffic, by device used: cellphones (59.1%), laptops or computers (39.3%), tablets (1.6%), other devices (0.03%)

33% of adults now own some form of smart wrist device.

Some Hope for Non-deployment Funds?

There is still some glimmer of hope that states will see some of the BEAD non-deployment funds. I call it a glimmer of hope because the issue is far from settled.

In a December 21 online post, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was still taking credit for having saved taxpayers about $21 billion through changes in the BEAD rules. He was responding to a Wall Street Journal editorial (Trump Unbreaks the Internet), that had praised NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth for the change in direction of the BEAD program. Secretary Lutnick said the Administration is fixing the broadband mess left behind by the Biden Administration and that Commerce has stopped funding broadband builds he characterized as “rip-off projects run by powerful lobbyists who are very good at getting grants and very bad at delivering results”.

In December, there was some movement by Congress to require NTIA to release the BEAD nondeployment funds. Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) introduced the Supporting U.S. Critical Connectivity and Economic Strategy and Security (SUCCESS) for BEAD Act that would require NTIA to disburse funds not used for infrastructure to the States. On December 23, Representatives Andy Barr and Hal Rogers, Republicans from Kentucky, introduced a matching bill in the House. These two laws just reinforce the rules in the original IIJA legislation that said that any of the $42.45 BEAD grants not used for infrastructure would still go to the States.

In early November, Arielle Roth characterized the nondeployment funds as savings in a speech made to the Hudson Institute, which signaled that NTIA didn’t want to send the money to States. However, in a forum at the Free State Foundation on December 2, Roth said she was “operating under the assumption that the states will get to use their BEAD savings. But again, nothing has been finalized.” She also said in that forum that  “any spending must produce real, measurable value, not duplicate investment the private sector is already making.”

Obviously, none of this makes NTIA’s intention clear for non-deployment funds. The issue is further complicated by an Executive Order from the White House that said that non-deployment funds can’t be flowed to States that adopt “onerous” restrictions on artificial intelligence.

NTIA has said that it will make a decision about non-deployment funds after it finalizes all of the BEAD infrastructure grants. As I write this blog, the BEAD plans of 39 states and territories have been accepted by NTIA, and the agency said it hopes to finalize the remaining plans in January.

It’s clear that earlier in the year, Secretary Lutnick intended to cut BEAD grants to claim savings on government spending. He said so many times, and is still referring to the non-deployment funds as savings.

I assume there has been a lot of lobbying on the topic from those in Congress and Governors. The House and Senate bills that require releasing the funds have been proposed by Republicans. Perhaps the pressure the lobbying for the funds is being effective since most of the large dollar amounts of nondeployment funds are in red States, including Texas ($2.04 B), North Carolina ($1.12 B), Georgia ($1.00 B), Missouri ($946 M), Alabama ($869 M), Florida ($869 M), Louisiana ($856 M), Arkansas ($692 M), Kentucky ($623 M), Tennessee ($609 M), Ohio ($517 N), and South Carolina ($510 M).

There is no way to know what the restriction on non-deployment due to AI will mean. A sizable majority of states either have already passed AI regulations or are considering them. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis reacted to the Executive Order by saying that Florida absolutely reserves the right to regulate AI, and I suspect a lot of state legislatures feel that way. I guess it will boil down to how NTIA interprets the term “onerous” regulation in the Executive Order.

The bottom line of all of this is that it’s clear as mud about whether States will see non-deployment funds, but the issue is not dead. We’ll probably know more by the end of the first quarter.

ISP New Year’s Resolutions

It’s the time of the year for New Year’s resolutions, and I asked some of my ISP clients if they are carrying unfinished tasks into the new year. Some of my clients laughed and told me that some of these tasks have been on their list for years.

Some of the wish list ‘resolutions’ I heard for 2026 included:

Integrate Records. Several ISPs said their customer and mapping records are less than ideal. They knew what a fully integrated records system should look like, where every record associated with a given customer is available at the fingertips of staff. They also want a system where the details of the physical network are integrated with customer records to be able to quickly identify where to look when there are outages or troubles. They also want a system where every new customer event and any new construction are easily and automatically integrated into existing records.

Reduce Truck Rolls. Several ISPS said they want to find ways to reduce truck rolls. They send trucks too many times when a problem could have been handled remotely. Conversely, they want to provide great customer service, and they want to send trucks when needed. In a competitive environment, they aren’t comfortable with charging customers for unneeded truck rolls.

Should They Raise Rates? Several ISPs are struggling with the idea of raising rates. They see that big ISPs are still raising rates. They are experiencing higher costs and know they should raise rates, but are still hesitant to do so.

Understand Profitability Better. Related to the question of raising rates, ISPs told me they would like to understand the factors that most impact their profitability. Are there expenses or functions they can drop that will save money? ISPs said their accounting system is a good way to measure monthly margins, but that they don’t get enough detail to fully understand the costs of operating the business.

Benefits Getting Too Expensive. Some ISPs say they are troubled by seeing the cost of health insurance and other benefits growing far faster than other costs. They struggle with what to do about it, and don’t want to cut benefits, but are worried about the cost trend.

Improve Sales to Businesses. Several ISPs told me that they have never felt fully comfortable selling to businesses in the same way that they sell residential broadband.

Dealing with Churn. Several ISPs said they struggle with finding a solution for dealing with churn. Too many times, a customer will move, and they don’t reach the new tenants until it’s too late.

Clear Out Inventory. A few ISPs laughed and told me that their accountants want them to clean out accumulated inventory, but that they dread the paperwork that comes with trying to quantify the mass of old electronics and construction materials that are no longer useful.

If you are an ISP, what unfinished tasks or goals are on your list?

Smartphones and Digital Literacy

A friend of mine, Frederick Pilot, recently asked me an interesting question. Is digital literacy that comes from using a smartphone the same as digital literacy from using a computer? It’s a great question, because the majority of Internet users in the world only have broadband access through a smartphone. In developing nations, 90% of broadband users only have access to a smartphone. In the U.S., 16% of adults only use a smartphone to reach the Internet.

There are skills needed to master using a computer that can’t be learned from using a smartphone. Computer users learn to use a mouse and to type – even people who speak to a computer need the mouse and keyboard. People working on computers learn how to create, save, and manage files. Computer users learn how to use operating systems and software programs.

By contrast, smartphone users mostly learn how to use apps. While some apps are complex, the skills learned generally apply mostly to the specific app.

It’s clear that learning how to navigate an app ecosystem is very different than mastering a computer ecosystem. Of course, some things are the same for both sets of users. Streaming video or shopping on websites is largely the same for everybody. Smartphone and computer users have email accounts and can use social media.

A key question is the degree to which only using a smartphone prepares somebody to work in a computer-based work environment. The biggest issue with smartphone-only users is that they have not learned to use a keyboard to type. It’s hard to imagine many computer-related jobs that don’t require at least some typing.

Interestingly, there are many work functions today that look more like apps than like spreadsheets or word documents. I recently visited the doctor for my annual physical, and they’ve converted to a system that captures and transcribes what the doctor says as notes in the patient history. Much of the rest of the effort of using the system means clicking through a bunch of forms and checkboxes. But the doctor and staff still need to type. The doctor edits the notes if they aren’t accurate, and some of the forms require a typed response. This is a new system, and I have to imagine that over time, the amount of typing needed will decrease. My doctor said that his favorite feature is that the system always spells drugs and medical terms properly.

Training people to use a computer has changed a lot in recent years. It wasn’t too long ago when computer training meant learning how to use a word processor and a spreadsheet. People who train others how to use computers tell me they take a more practical approach today, and that training involves things like learning mouse basics; learning basic keyboard skills; learning how to create, find, save, and organize files; learning how to navigate an operating system; Internet basics like searching and using a browser; security awareness and how to avoid scams; and basic troubleshooting and what to do when things go wrong. Much computer training today is personalized and teaches a person to use the web functions that are most important to them, like using a banking website.

None of this discussion answers the original question, which asks if smartphone users are digitally literate. I’m sure that many smartphone users are fully literate in terms of being able to navigate the web. But that doesn’t mean they have the digital skills that employers are looking for. And that begs the question of what it means to be digitally literate.

100 Years of Bell Labs

When I first entered the industry in the 70s, Bell Labs held an exalted place in the industry that was responsible for inventing and perfecting the technologies we all used. Bell Labs was founded and owned by the giant AT&T monopoly, and was operated with the brilliant concept of hiring the smartest people and letting them pursue research related to technology. Much of the research was funneled towards communication technologies, but covered a wide range of scientific and technical breakthroughs that benefited numerous industries.

Some of the key Bell Labs discoveries that benefited communications include:

  • The Transistor. Transistors replaced bulky vacuum tubes and were the basis for the microelectronics revolution.
  • Shannon’s Information Theory. This was the mathematical foundation of the digital age and defined how to treat data as a measurable entity (bits), and addressed data uncertainty, noise, efficient data compression, and transmission.
  • Fiber Optics. Bell Labs researched optical waves and turned that research into a technology for transmitting large amounts of data using lasers. Bell Labs discovered and developed erbium-doped fiber amplifiers (EDFAs), which were crucial for boosting signals over long distances, and that led to the development of the internet backbone.
  • The First Communications Satellite. Bell Labs designed and built Telstar, the world’s first communication satellite. This venture also included breakthroughs in solar cells and in travelling-wave tube transponders that amplified communications signals to reach Earth.
  • The Cellular Network Concept. Bell Labs scientists developed the concept of arranging wireless networks into cells. The Lab went on to develop the technologies used for 1G, 2G, and 3G cellular networks.
  • UNIX and the C Programming Language. Bell Labs developed early programming languages, which became the basis for modern programming.
  • Digital Signal Processing (DSP): Scientists developed the concepts, algorithms, and hardware used to develop the first single-chip digital processor that has become the basis for chips used for most modern electronics.

 Bell Labs researchers earned nine Nobel Prizes and pushed the boundaries of physics, computing, and telecommunications. IEEE recently celebrated some of the achievements of Bell Labs in areas other than communications, which include:

  • Molecular Beam Epitaxy. This was a chip-making process that is key to the manufacture of modern chips and lasers.
  • Fractional Quantum Hall Effect. This physics breakthrough defined how electrons could become entangled, which led to the development of quantum computing.
  • Convolutional Neural Networks. This is a specialized deep learning model inspired by the human visual cortex, which has become the basis for modern AI.
  • Super Resolution Fluorescence Microscopy. This is a series of techniques that allow images to have resolution higher than the limits imposed by the diffraction limit of light, which has had major benefits in biological research.
  • Charged-coupled Device. This is a light-sensitive integrated circuit that captures images by converting photons into electrons, and which is the basis for digital imaging, medical imaging, and modern astronomy.

Bell Labs is now owned by Nokia, which acquired the company when it purchased Alcatel-Lucent. Lucent was the technology spin-off formed at the breakup of AT&T into the Baby Bell companies.

Congress Active with Broadband Bills

We’re near the end of the year, and Congress is recessed until the new year. That hasn’t stopped Congress from introducing interesting new bills related to broadband. Any bill introduced in the first year of Congress is not automatically carried over to the second year session, but I assume these new bills are meant for deliberation in 2026.

Support for Non-Deployment Funds. Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) introduced the Supporting U.S. Critical Connectivity and Economic Strategy and Security for BEAD Act. This legislation would authorize States to use any remaining BEAD non-deployment funds that were not used to build infrastructure. The bill directs NTIA to give these funds to States to support functions like enhancing public safety, improving network resiliency, strengthening national security, and developing a qualified workforce for emerging technologies. This is a major issue since non-deployment has grown to over 21 billion, which is half of the $42.5 billion BEAD funding.

To some degree, this law feels redundant because it reiterates the same use of non-deployment funds that was directed in the original IIJA legislation that created BEAD. The need for this bill is only an issue because NTIA has been referring to the monies not used for broadband deployment as ‘savings’, which they want to return to the U.S. Treasury. If enacted, this would be Congress’s way of emphasizing that it meant what was written in the original law. If enacted, it also means that a lot more of the BEAD funding could have been used to build fiber and other long-term technologies instead of going to satellite broadband.

Expand Mental Telehealth. Representatives Andrea Salinas (D-OR) and Diana Harshbarger (R-TN) reintroduced the bipartisan Home-Based Telemental Health Care Act. If enacted, the legislation would expand access to telehealth services, including mental health and substance use care. The legislation is aimed at rural Americans who have barriers to in-person care, especially for individuals working in the farming, fishing, and forestry industries.

The legislation would create a new grant program that would provide funding for mental health and substance use care for people living in designated Health Professional Shortage Areas. The grants would be managed by the Department of Health and Human Services in consultation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Funding could be used to expand telemental health services, including providing broadband access and devices to use telehealth technology. The grants would also explore the feasibility of expanding the program to in-person services. The bill authorizes $10 million in grants for fiscal years 2025 through 2029.

Sunset Section 230 Immunity. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Josh Hawley (R-MO), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ashley Moody (R-FL), and Peter Welch (D-VT) introduced the Sunset Section 230 Act. The legislation would repeal Section 230 of the FCC rules two years after the date of enactment. Section 230 was created in 1996, as a part of the Communications Decency Act. The purpose of Section 230 is to grant limited immunity to online platforms for user-generated content. Section 230 also shields online platforms from any damages from good-faith efforts to moderate or block objectionable content.

The stated purpose of the new legislation is to allow the public to hold platforms accountable for allowing illegal content, child exploitation, and misinformation, based on the underlying premise that the big web platforms currently have near-immunity for damages that arise from their “profits over people” operating model. This is going to be a controversial law, and opponents of the legislation argue that the law will stifle free speech, force platforms to over-censor to avoid massive lawsuits, harm small online platforms, and fail to address underlying issues of harmful content amplification by big tech.