Hill Democrats, Others See No Warning Signs Yet in Early GOP Broadband Oversight

Top Republicans on the House and Senate Communications subcommittees told us their recent broadband oversight moves weren't unfairly partisan and they seek a more critical assessment of the Biden administration’s implementation of connectivity programs from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and COVID-19 aid measures to prevent appropriations misuse. The subpanels' top Democrats and other stakeholders told us they’re not particularly concerned so far about the tone of GOP queries but are continuing to monitor how they compare with Congress’ past oversight of the controversial Broadband Technology Opportunities Program and other initiatives.

“It’s absolutely essential” that House Communications take the lead in doing oversight of federal broadband spending, including of NTIA's $42.5 billion broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program, especially to ensure the money doesn't go to underserved areas unless all unserved areas have connectivity, said subpanel Chairman Bob Latta, R-Ohio. He still intends to bring FCC commissioners and NTIA officials in “quite often” for hearings that will in part focus on their respective broadband programs since “we didn’t do much oversight” during the last Congress. House Communications hasn’t scheduled such hearings but will hold a Wednesday panel on 32 bills aimed at easing broadband permitting processes (see 2304120071).

Ensuring “all of these dollars are going where they’re supposed to be going” shouldn’t be “a Republican or Democratic issue,” Latta said. He hopes any broadband oversight hearings Communications holds won’t turn into a venue for partisan potshots. House Commerce Oversight Subcommittee members divided along party lines during a March hearing on the Commerce Department’s own monitoring of IIJA spending (see 2303290074). Commerce Oversight Chairman Morgan Griffith, R-Va., told us he intends to work with Latta to ensure “we’re not stepping on each other’s toes” on broadband matters.

Latta cited the bipartisan criticism of the FCC’s broadband coverage maps that continued throughout Ajit Pai’s chairmanship into current Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel’s tenure as an example of how House Communications may unite during this Congress on connectivity oversight. “We didn’t look at it as a political issue” and that was critical to building consensus pressure for the FCC to commit to improving its data collection practices, Latta said. “It’s important that” the subpanel maintain pressure on the FCC on its mapping practices and how NTIA’s administering the state-level BEAD block grants.

There has been no coordination between Latta and Senate Communications ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., on broadband oversight matters. “We’ve got issues that we’re looking at and I’m sure” Senate Commerce Republicans will do the same, “but I wouldn’t say right that we’ve had coordination” on those matters, Latta said. Thune, at times with Commerce ranking member Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has been doing his own review since December of all federal connectivity programs’ oversight of funding disbursals independent of panel Democrats (see 2212060067).

Coordination Questions

Thune acknowledged in an interview that “most of what we’ve done so far has been Republican oversight,” but he’s hoping some Senate Commerce Democrats will become involved over time. The Senate passed IIJA in 2021 with some GOP support, but other recent broadband programs have been “totally Democrat” initiatives, he said: It “would be nice to get some Dem interest in pushing back on some of these requirements that the administration’s imposing on telecom providers in order to qualify for the funds.”

“We assume the Dems are going to” back “most of the things that” the Biden administration is “doing in terms of putting conditions on applying for some of that funding,” including language in NTIA’s 2022 BEAD notice of funding opportunity that previously drew GOP ire (see 2206090072), Thune said. “I’ve raised” concerns with Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack about rules for some of the department’s rural connectivity initiatives that could allow for overbuilding and duplication of existing broadband networks “and they don’t seem to be concerned about it.”

“I think senators acting individually can raise questions that they may have” about issues they care about without necessarily teaming up with members of the other party, said Senate Communications Chairman Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M.: “I have good working relationships with both of them.”

"We all want to see investments maximized and I for one am still concerned that there’s not enough in the system to completely connect the country,” Lujan said. “I want to see that every dollar is going to be maximized to connect the country and that we also lift up the affordability component. I’m also glad to hear Republicans talking about” the FCC’s affordable connectivity program “to see what we can do before it expires at the end of the year.”

House Communications ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., believes there will be significant bipartisan agreement on broadband oversight but also warned the focus can’t be on “bashing NTIA all the time” and specifically BEAD when a range of other programs fall within the subpanel’s jurisdiction. Latta “and I work together on a lot of these things” and she expects that cooperation to continue.

House Appropriations Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky., was among lawmakers who pressed Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo on NTIA’s administration of BEAD and other broadband programs during a Tuesday hearing on the Commerce Department’s FY 2024 budget request. Rogers said he’s concerned by an August Congressional Research Service report that said the U.S. “still may not achieve universal broadband coverage” after IIJA spending “due to cost, affordability, and regulatory matters.” He questioned how Commerce would ensure BEAD won’t result in overbuilding existing networks.

“Congress was crystal clear” that unserved areas should get BEAD money “first” and Commerce intends “to administer this program faithful to Congress’ intent,” Raimondo said. States “have to show us” how they’re using money from BEAD and other agencies’ broadband programs. “It’s our attempt” to ensure “we work seamlessly with the other departments and make sure we meet the mission of everybody having broadband,” she said: “I am not pretending this is easy,” but “we’re doing our best to hold ourselves accountable.” Raimondo later confirmed to Rep. David Trone, D-Md., that states will know "by June 30" the amount of BEAD money they'll get.

'Very Different Deal'

New Street’s Blair Levin, who managed development of the FCC’s 2010 National Broadband Plan, told us he anticipates lawmakers’ primary oversight focus will be on BEAD but is less certain how much ACP and other FCC programs will get congressional attention. “I just don’t understand what the point of oversight” of current FCC broadband issues “would be” since the commission is addressing mapping issues that drew Congress’ attention, he said: ACP is like every new program in that it “has its flaws,” but the FCC is also actively trying to fix it.

“A lot of complexities” in BEAD may mean oversight of that program may not necessarily involve the same type of ire BTOP generated in lawmakers, Levin said. NTIA “decided who got the money” from BTOP “and where it went,” while with BEAD “Congress set a formula” for the agency to follow in distributing the money to states, he said: “It’s a very different deal in terms of oversight.”

“I’m very encouraged” that Thune’s review of the broadband programs and House Commerce leaders’ oversight efforts will result in a “very serious look at how this money is going to be spent,” said Citizens Against Government Waste Vice President-Policy and Government Affairs Deborah Collier. “I hope there’s a lot more stringent oversight of these programs starting from the get-go” than happened with BTOP, especially since there wasn’t the same level of built-in transparency in IIJA’s statutory language. “I would not expect” lawmakers to now “modify the broadband dollars that are being distributed,” but lawmakers should consider “merging” programs that “are not performing” as Congress intended with more effective initiatives, she said.

Public Knowledge Policy Counsel Nicholas Garcia believes “bipartisan cooperation” on broadband oversight could give Congress an opportunity to enact “some additional transparency” rules for IIJA-created programs. PK “advocated for” Congress to revisit some of IIJA’s language that exempts programs from Freedom of Information Act disclosure rules because it would allow the public to get “better access to information about how these programs are being administered,” he said. Oversight can also give lawmakers a better understanding of which IIJA programs “really work,” such as ACP, and spur action to provide them with “an ongoing source of funding” beyond what the infrastructure law authorized, Garcia said.