We Need to Fundamentally Rethink How USF Programs are Funded

Here are at least three very good reasons why we shouldn’t wait any longer to address the rising Universal Service Fund (USF) contribution factor:

• First, the contribution mechanism is hopelessly outdated.  At one time, in the not too distant past, USF programs were primarily voice-focused.  The original goal of the USF program was to make basic telephone service available to all Americans, even those in the most remote parts of the country. In the years since, all USF programs, including the Lifeline program, have transitioned to support broadband services and demand for funding has increased. Yet the contribution mechanism remains in the horse-and-buggy world of traditional interstate voice and transport services where revenues have been declining for years.
• Second, the current contribution system is unsustainable.  We are using declining voice revenues to pay for programs that are increasingly broadband-centric. 
• In my opinion, reform of the existing mechanism is politically impossible and might just be a temporary band-aid at best.

The pandemic has made very real just how critical broadband connectivity is to U.S. productivity, economic success, learning and human connection.  It’s time we get equally real about ensuring broadband is available and affordable for all Americans.