In the digital age, strong economies depend on robust internet infrastructure. Yet much of rural America still lacks access to basic internet service.
Fortunately, rural electric cooperatives are stepping up. Over 200 co-ops are delivering economic opportunity in 43 states across rural America, connecting more than 2 million homes, businesses, hospitals and schools with some of the highest speeds available anywhere in the U.S.
The federal government is a key partner in these efforts. Broadband programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) have supported the construction of broadband networks in some of the most expensive-to-reach rural areas.
NTIA’s Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment Program (BEAD) is one of the largest federal broadband programs to date. With $42 billion allocated toward rural broadband buildout and adoption, the BEAD program represents a historic opportunity to bring high-performance broadband to all of rural America.
But BEAD’s delayed implementation, shifting guidance and repeated rule changes have created a program defined by uncertainty and confusion. Instead of accelerating deployment, these ongoing revisions have discouraged participation and slowed progress.
Even more troubling, NTIA’s overhaul of the program last year changed BEAD’s core approach by redirecting investments away from durable, future-proof fiber infrastructure and toward the lowest-cost solutions. While this may appear fiscally responsible, it undermines the program’s long-term mission. Rural communities don’t need the cheapest networks; they need infrastructure that will remain viable for decades. Technologies that meet only today’s minimum standards will quickly become outdated, forcing additional investment and perpetuating the digital divide.
Moving forward, the industry needs a clear priority for scalable, high-performance broadband that can meet future demand.
At the same time, BEAD’s delays have increased costs and complicated equipment procurement, making already challenging rural projects even harder to complete. These challenges are compounded by new requirements imposed late in the process.
In particular, the requirement that electric cooperatives will be subject to FCC pole attachment rates for their entire electric system represents a clear break from long-standing federal policy that specifically bans that requirement. Some electric cooperatives have already walked away from BEAD funding due to this requirement.
The consequences are already clear
In some areas, cost constraints and unrealistic funding assumptions have made projects unfeasible, leaving communities without a bidder. Addressing this requires aligning funding levels with the actual cost of deploying networks in high-cost rural areas. In other areas, proposed projects rely on technologies that will struggle to keep pace with rising bandwidth demand. This can be avoided by reinforcing a technology-neutral framework that prioritizes long-term performance, not just upfront affordability. And in too many areas, additional providers have dropped out of the program altogether due to shifting rules and untenable obligations. Bringing these providers back will require a streamlined path for re-entry, coupled with more realistic requirements and stable program rules.
Taken together, these issues point to a troubling reality: as currently implemented, BEAD is falling short of its statutory mandate to connect every rural American to reliable high-speed internet.
Without meaningful reform, the program risks enforcing a new digital divide — one where rural communities are either left behind entirely or connected with inferior, short-lived broadband infrastructure.
In addition to these needed reforms to BEAD, there is also the matter of the remaining $21 billion in BEAD “non-deployment” funds. There are good opportunities to leverage these funds:
- A meaningful set-aside of remaining funds for back-end deployment is essential to reach communities left out due to flawed data, cost overruns or provider withdrawals.
- Permitting remains a major bottleneck. States should be empowered to use non-deployment funds to modernize and streamline permitting application systems, reducing delays that increase costs and slow construction.
- Rural broadband networks cannot succeed without sufficient backbone capacity. States need flexibility to invest non-deployment funds in middle-mile infrastructure to prevent bottlenecks that threaten reliability and limit future scalability.
- Pole replacements and other work to prepare electrical systems for communications equipment attachments have long been acceptable uses of BEAD funds. States should be able to use non-deployment resources as pole replacement funds. And pole replacement investments should prioritize maintaining the safety and reliability of the electric grid.
Investing the second half of BEAD's $42 billion broadband fund wisely is critical.
Without high-speed connectivity for schools, hospitals, households and businesses, rural America’s economic strength and quality of life is at risk. BEAD was intended to solve that problem. Instead, its current trajectory threatens to prolong it — and rural communities may once again be left waiting.
Jim Matheson is Chief Executive Officer of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), the national service organization that represents the nation’s more than 900 not-for-profit, consumer-owned electric cooperatives. NRECA members provide service to 42 million people in 48 states. Jim joined NRECA in July 2016 following distinguished careers in both the public and private sectors.
Opinion pieces from industry experts, analysts or our editorial staff do not necessarily represent the opinions of Fierce Network.