Low-income

The case for city-operated broadband is compelling. It offers comparatively fast service. It’s celebrated as a means by which to preserve net neutrality.

A group of Democratic Sens slammed Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai over his proposal to cut down on a program that helps make broadband and phone service more affordable for low-income households. The Sens' letter targets a proposal introduced by Chairman Pai in November that would significantly curb the scope of benefits from the Lifeline program, which roughly 6.5 million people in poor communities rely on to get access to high-speed internet. Eight million people are eligible for the subsidy program.

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (D-NY) sent a letter signed by over 60 House members to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, urging him to protect the Lifeline program which provides access to phone and broadband services to over 13 million low-income Americans, the majority of whom earn less than $10,000 a year. 

[Speech] As we have seen from data from the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, big internet providers have been intentional about focusing their investments on deploying broadband technologies, in high-income urban, suburban and middle-income neighborhoods. And as you already know, there is a glaring correlation between areas of high poverty, and places where companies have not invested in new technologies, such as fiber. The impact here is severe. Those being left out, not only are less able to get ahead, but they are more likely to be left behind. 

When Seattle librarians visited the gated cluster of tents and tiny houses that make up Camp Second Chance in White Center, they brought Star Wars comics, Dean Koontz books and Jon Krakauer’s “Into the Wild” for homeless campers to check out. But the most popular item was­n’t a book. It was a Wi-Fi hotspot in a lockbox with a combination.

March 8, the Voices for Internet Freedom coalition hosted a briefing for members of Congress and their staff about the disastrous policies the Federal Communications Commission is moving forward that would make it harder for poor people to access vital communications services. The FCC’s War on the Poor briefing brought together affected communities, advocates and policy experts for a panel discussion about the FCC’s proposal to roll back the Lifeline program, the vote to undo Title II Net Neutrality, and the agency’s refusal to stand up to predatory prison-phone companies.

The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), an agency of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), herein referred to as RUS or the Agency, announces its Community Connect Grant Program application window for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai says he wants to help poor people. “I have often said that my highest priority as chairman is closing the digital divide–the gap between those who have access to next-generation technologies and those who don’t,” he told a Senate committee in September when talking about reforms to a subsidy program called Lifeline. But critics say he’s doing the opposite, including with that very program. Unlike in the net neutrality debate, critics of Chairman Pai’s latest efforts are now coming from the left and the right.

[Commentary] The Lifeline program is one of the Federal Communications Commission’s most important, most noble ventures. It is also one of the most problematic, suffering repeated criticism from the Government Accountability Office and others for waste, fraud, and abuse. In an effort to reform the program, the FCC has suggested limiting Lifeline participation to facilities-based telecommunications providers.