Now that New York’s Affordable Broadband Act has gone into effect, other states are looking to mandate low broadband rates for low-income households. The New York law went into effect when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the case.
State Senator Pavel Pavano of Massachusetts proposed SD1200, “An Act preserving broadband service for low-income consumers”. This law proposes that all ISPs offer 100 Mbps broadband to qualified low-income households for $15 per month. This fee must include equipment rental and any usage charges, meaning no separate charges for modems or for data caps. Unlike New York, there is no exception for small ISPs. The qualification for the discount seems to match the qualification used for the now-defunct federal ACP plan. Once every five years, ISPs can increase rates by the lesser of 2% or the most recent annual increase in the consumer price index. ISPs also can offer 200 Mbps for $20 per month, with a rate increase allowed every two years.
In California, Assemblymember Tasha Boerner introduced AB 353 that provides broadband discounts for low-income households. The bill generally requires ISPs to offer affordable home broadband to customers. This proposed law doesn’t yet suggest any specific rates or broadband speeds, but the intention of legislators is to add that requirement at some point.
The proposed bill is being linked to the larger Digital Equity Bill of Rights legislation and introduces the legislative concept that ISPs should have affordable rates.
There may be more legislation coming from around the country. Twenty-two states filed a brief in support of New York when the issue was being considered by the Supreme Court. The petition supported the concept that States have the right to set broadband rates when the FCC and the federal government decides to not do so. The petition was signed by California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Many of these states might have been supporting the idea of states’ rights, so we’ll have to see how many eventually result in broadband legislation.
As would be expected, ISPs are already reacting to these proposed laws. A number of ISPs are actively lobbying against the proposed bill in Massachusetts.
A group of ISPs have also petitioned the Supreme Court after its decision and asking the Court to rethink about taking the issue. While nothing is impossible, courts don’t normally change their mind about what goes on a docket. However, there will likely be new appeals if the Massachusetts or California bills become laws.