The Economic, Political, Historic and Even Theological Case for ACP

Return to March 2020. A horrible month for the United States. A great month for broadband. The COVID experience led to provisions—widely praised even by those who didn’t vote for them—in the 2021 Infrastructure Bill, to address the digital divide. Yet the United States may soon take the greatest step backward any country has ever taken to increase its digital divide. Why? The legislation’s Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which subsidizes broadband for nearly 23 million households, will soon run out of funds. The economic case for the ACP is clear—a recent economics paper estimated that for every dollar spent on the program, the US GDP would increase by $3.89. So is the political case. A conservative think tank recently released a poll showing 79% of voters support continuing the ACP “including 62% of Republicans, 78% of Independents, and 96% of Democrats.” While the Bible doesn't mention broadband, it does mandate the moral sentiment behind most assistive programs: that we have an obligation to help people so that they can live among us in dignity, in health, in prosperity. So, whether one bases one’s policy preferences on economics, politics or theology, the answer is the same. Congress should extend ACP.

[Blair Levin is the Policy Advisor to New Street Research and a nonresident senior fellow at Brookings Metro​. Prior to joining New Street, Blair served as Chief of Staff to FCC Chairman Reed Hundt (1993-1997), directed the writing of the United States National Broadband Plan (2009-2010), and was a policy analyst for the equity research teams at Legg Mason and Stif Nicolaus. Levin is a graduate of Yale College and Yale Law School.]