Evan Feinman, the mastermind behind the innovative $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program, bid farewell to his role last Friday, after not being reappointed for a new term. His departure comes amidst a whirlwind of changes proposed by the new administration, which he warns may not necessarily be in the best interest of rural communities longing for high-speed internet access.
Here are the key points surrounding this development:
- BEAD’s Establishment: The BEAD Program was established in 2021 with the noble goal of bringing high-speed internet access to rural areas that have long been overlooked in the digital age. Despite its grand ambitions, the program has faced challenges and criticisms since its inception.
- Secretary of Commerce’s Overhaul: The new Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, recently announced plans to overhaul the BEAD Program, citing the lack of internet connections implemented during the previous administration’s tenure. Lutnick emphasized the need for a "tech-neutral stance," signaling a potential shift away from the traditional preference for faster fiber connections to explore alternatives like satellite internet, such as Elon Musk’s Starlink.
- Feinman’s Outlook: In an email shared with colleagues, Feinman expressed concerns about the proposed changes and their potential impact on rural communities. While advocating for the removal of unnecessary requirements, he cautioned against a complete abandonment of fiber connections. He emphasized the importance of staying true to the original vision laid out by Congress and ensuring that the needs of rural America are not overlooked in favor of profit-driven motives.
In conclusion, the looming changes in the BEAD Program raise significant questions about the future of internet access in rural and small-town America. It is crucial for policymakers to prioritize the interests of underserved communities and uphold the original mission of the program. Ignoring these considerations in favor of short-term gains for a select few would be a disservice to the very populations the program seeks to empower. It is time for a thoughtful and inclusive approach that puts the needs of rural America at the forefront of decision-making.
