The Trump administration continues to give muddled guidance in terms of the whopping $21 billion in “non-deployment” funds states should have at their disposal from the “savings” created by unwelcome changes to the federal BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment) program.
As we noted last month, dramatic, unpopular, and unlawful changes to BEAD by the National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA) have resulted in infighting and delays, after the Trump administration tried to steer billions in taxpayer funds to slower and more congested satellite broadband networks owned by the President’s biggest donors.
The broadly-criticized shift was sold as a new “benefit of the bargain” program necessary to “cut costs.” The change required that all 56 BEAD eligible states and territories complete a “benefit of the bargain” round of subgrantee selection and completely retool their broadband deployment plans – often at significant cost to states.
As part of that retooling, the Trump administration demanded that states prioritize the cheapest – but not necessarily the best, most future proof, or reliable – broadband options, a direct nod to lobbying pressure from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite providers like Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Starlink, and Jeff Bezos’ Leo (previously project Kuiper).
But shifting funding priority from affordable fiber to congested and expensive satellite broadband service actually risks driving up monthly costs for Americans, and dramatically undermines a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bridge the digital divide.
The illusory savings created by the Trump administration’s changes has resulted in an estimated $21 billion of BEAD’s $42.5 billion in broadband funding falling into a bureaucratic purgatory, resulting in ample infighting over where that money should go, whether that’s back to the Treasury, back to the states, or repurposed elsewhere.
But Congress and the underlying infrastructure law was very specific: the entirety of the $42.5 billion in BEAD deployment funds was to be spent on broadband expansion. The Trump administration, operating against the law (according to the GAO) and primarily in the service of key donors, clearly has other ideas.
That has included threatening to withhold already-awarded BEAD funds entirely from states that try to stand up to the telecom lobby or try to ensure taxpayer-funded broadband funded by the program is actually affordable to the public.
More Delays By Politicians Who Claimed To Hate Delays
A key criticism by Republicans of the BEAD program last election season was that there were too many delays in actually getting the money to states. While nobody would confuse BEAD with a poster child for government efficiency, many of the delays had very good reasons – such as the need for states and feds to completely remap our understanding of broadband access after decades of dysfunction on the subject.
But ironically the Trump administration’s efforts to redirect funds to billionaire LEO satellite benefactors is creating all manner of new delays for states eager to get started building out essential broadband networks.
After retooling their state-level broadband mapping and deployment plans to adhere to the new efforts to deprioritize fiber (especially open access, community-owned fiber), states are waiting for clear guidance on non-deployment funds from the Trump NTIA that has failed to materialize.
The NTIA was supposed to offer more concrete guidance on the fate of these funds earlier this month after gathering broad public feedback. But recently the agency announced they’d be further delaying this guidance for ambiguous reasons.
“While our guidance was expected by next week, we are taking additional time to review the comments and finalize our approach to ensure these funds are spent as efficiently and responsibly as possible. American taxpayers work hard for their money and deserve nothing less from this Administration,” Roth said in a prepared statement on March 6.
States – including 10 House Democrats – have been begging the NTIA for additional clarity on how this money can be used since last summer. Last December, 164 state legislators penned a letter urging Commerce to release the full amount that states were set to receive through BEAD.
“Congress was clear: non-deployment investments are not optional extras, they are central to BEAD’s mission,” the lawmakers wrote. The hope is that if the funds can’t be used for affordable fiber, it can at least be leveraged to help fund concepts adjacent to improved access equity.
“Non-deployment funds are poised to support a range of critical activities, such as building AI infrastructure, streamlining permitting and pole attachment processes, developing the telecom workforce, improving middle mile and cellular networks, enhancing cybersecurity and emergency services, expanding telehealth and education opportunities, and fostering broadband adoption and affordability,” they said. “Effective deployment depends on non-deployment. Without it, BEAD will fail to deliver the full value Congress intended and taxpayers deserve.”
BEAD Advocates Reject Potential Claw Back of Funds
There’s been no shortage of criticism of the Trump administration’s retooling of the BEAD program, and the obvious plans – by multiple overlapping interests – to hijack misrepresented “cost savings” away from shoring up affordable fiber broadband access. Especially given the administration’s issues with oversight, transparency, and accountability.
“NTIA should not permit BEAD funds to subsidize things that would otherwise be profitably accomplished by private parties,” warned the Benton Institute For Broadband And Society. “NTIA should reject calls to not use nondeployment funds and instead claw them back from states.”
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick faced bipartisan pressure at an appropriations hearing last month to offer greater clarity and guidance, and committed to not rescind the funds after pressure from Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski.
On March 10, House Energy and Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone Jr. wrote a letter to the NTIA reminding the agency of the likely illegality of the Trump administration’s gambit, and that time is of the essence with billions of investment on the line.
“Executive orders issued by the President do not supersede federal law,” Pallone wrote “They certainly do not empower NTIA to impound billions of dollars—in full or on a state-by-state basis—that Congress authorized and appropriated to achieve specific policy outcomes, including universal connectivity, affordability, scalable infrastructure, and broadband adoption,” Pallone wrote.
“NTIA should not risk tying up the BEAD Program in years of legal challenges and further delaying its already overdue implementation.”
Header image of U.S. Treasury building courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0, Attribution 4.0 International
Inline image of Starlink dish in residential front yard courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, CC0 1.0, CC0 1.0 Universal
Inline image of NTIA administrator Arielle Roth courtesy of Broadband Breakfast
