Hill Staffers Skeptical About Moving USF to General Fund

ASPEN -- Funding the Universal Service Fund (USF) through general appropriations might make sense on paper, but speaking practically it might not be a feasible goal for Congress, Democratic and Republican staffers said Tuesday.

Staffers for the Senate and House Commerce committees discussed potential funding for USF and the affordable connectivity program (ACP) during the Technology Policy Institute Aspen Forum. Those casting doubt on the prospect of funding USF through general appropriations included John Lin, counsel to House Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash.; Johanna Thomas, counsel to ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J.; and Jamie Susskind, legislative director for Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. USF is currently dependent on contributions from service providers.

General appropriation makes sense on a “blank piece of paper,” said Lin, but the USF is almost 30 years old and Congress relies on a “broken budget appropriations process.” Shifting an $8 billion program into the general fund is “not going to be easy,” he said. Such a proposal would need to be part of a much broader discussion about federal appropriations and would involve contentious debate about tax rates and the deficit, he added.

Thomas said pivoting to general appropriations would raise concerns about congressional appropriators commandeering USF oversight duties from the Commerce committees. “It’s just practically going to be really hard,” she said. “Contribution reform” is part of the discussion, but “we’ll have to wait and see how those conversations go.” What Pallone is most focused on is providing affordable broadband access across the country, she said.

Susskind said general appropriation would likely be a better solution than the current distribution system. But the conversation is very complicated given legal uncertainty after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision on USF (see 2407240043) and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Chevron reversal (see 2406280043), she said. If USF is going to continue, it “probably needs to be rewritten,” she said. “There is a role for Congress to be playing here,” but Lin is correct that it might not be practical to shift USF to the general fund, said Susskind.

Lin said Republicans are open to discussions about reviving ACP, but it needs revisions that ensure only needy households are eligible. He said the committee majority found instances where trade associations in Washington, D.C., qualified for the program.

Susskind said the Senate Commerce Committee’s attempts to mark up legislation in July were tanked by rushed ACP amendments with billions of dollars at stake. “That’s not the way to have this conversation,” she said. “It’s an important conversation, but let’s have a real conversation. Let’s not just sort of throw stuff in there at the last minute without giving members an opportunity to think through these nuances.”

Thomas said it’s not a secret Democrats highly support refunding ACP. They’re “frustrated” Republican leadership hasn’t come to the table to discuss bipartisan changes, she said. Democrats will continue to seek short-term funding for the program, while also trying to reach an agreement on a longer-term funding solution, she said.

Lin said USF, ACP, the Lifeline program and school connectivity should be weighed together, and that includes taking a hard look at funding options. The committee majority, he said, is open to considering contributions from tech platforms and the digital ad industry. FCC Commissioners Geoffrey Starks and Anna Gomez discussed that concept Monday (see 2408190056).