California lawmakers’ efforts to pass a new law mandating affordable broadband access is at risk of being destroyed by industry lobbying. California insiders say the changes are so dramatic they may wind up making broadband affordability in the state worse – undermining years of digital equity activism and discarding a rare opportunity to bridge the digital divide.
The California Affordable Home Internet Act (AB 353), introduced by Assemblymember Tasha Boerner last January, would require that broadband providers in the state provide broadband at no more than $15 per month for low-income households participating in a qualified public assistance program.
The original legislation mandated that state residents should be able to receive $15 for all ISPs for broadband at speeds of 100 megabit per second (Mbps) downstream, 20 Mbps upstream. The proposal mirrored similar efforts by New York State which opened the door to other state efforts after the Supreme Court recently refused to hear a telecom industry challenge.
“I want to get something fair and reasonable that helps those who need it most,” Boerner said in a press release. “AB 353 will fill the gap and ensure our children can turn in their homework, families can get access to telehealth, and apply for jobs online.”
On June 4 a vote moved the legislation through the state Assembly and on to the state senate by a 52-17 margin.
But there’s increasingly evidence that Boerner – who saw significant campaign contributions from telecom giants last election cycle – has added significant amendments that degrade the bill’s speed definitions, weaken the California Public Utility Commission's (CPUC) ability to hold large telecoms accountable, and creates new financial risks for municipal broadband providers.
Many of the problematic changes were discussed on our most recent Connect This! show featuring Shayna Englin of the California Community Foundation. According to Englin the changes being made behind closed doors risk making the bill not only useless, but harmful.
“Where we are right now is [Boerner] has taken industry amendments – specifically cable industry amendments – that make this bill not even a broadband bill, and certainly not an affordability bill,” Englin said.
Death By A Thousand Industry-Friendly Amendments
Government sources familiar with the ongoing draft process say the lion’s share of the amendments being added to the bill are to the direct benefit of companies like Charter Communications, Cox, Verizon, and AT&T, likening the unpopular last-minute changes to an “industry wish list.”
Among them are a dramatic weakening of the definition of broadband from 100 Mbps down, 20 Mbps up, to a much slower 50 Mbps down, 10 Mbps up. That slower standard fails to even meet the already-flimsy federal FCC definition of “broadband. The slower upstream definition is a specific gift to cable companies who’ve long struggled to provide faster uploads.
“By setting this new, substandard bar for low-income Californians, AB 353 will lock communities into second-class connectivity,” California Alliance for Digital Equity’s (CADE) Lindsey Skolnik told ILSR.
Other late-game changes include an amendment eliminating the authority of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to regulate broadband affordability at all, as well as the elimination of any reporting requirements that would allow lawmakers to monitor industry compliance with the law.
Unlike New York State’s law, the changes also fail to empower any government agency to provide exemptions to municipal providers or smaller independent Internet service providers already struggling to keep pace with giant regional monopolies financially or politically.
Independent providers like Sonic – which currently offers some of the lowest rates for fiber access in California at $40 for 1 gigabit per second (Gbps) have expressed concerns the changes will chill expansion. Meanwhile, municipal providers have warned officials they can't obtain bonds to debt finance fiber to compete with the incumbents if they aren't exempted.
“The bill only has an exemption for Joint Powers Authorities – which takes care of the specific networks under development in some rural California counties, but does not address municipal, local agency, or small providers,” Englin told ILSR in an email.
Numerous sources familiar with the ongoing legislative efforts tell ILSR Boerner has been less than receptive to concerns.
“With recent and forthcoming amendments, AB 353 will set a dangerous ‘separate and unequal’ precedent for internet access in California that would leave our most marginalized communities with subpar service and extremely limited consumer protections,” Skolnik noted. “For this reason CADE is firmly opposing the bill, alongside many other digital equity advocates.”
An Historic Missed Opportunity Driven By Greed
The original bill had significant potential to reshape affordable broadband in the state. A recent study by the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office found that offering 100/20 Mbps service for $15 a month would only cost the state’s four largest ISPs less than 1 cent on the dollar in revenue, while providing nearly $100 million per year in savings to low-income state residents.
Even this modest ask wound up being too much for the state’s regional telecom monopolies, which have spent decades trying to undermine competition across the state, which in turn is directly responsible for high prices, spotty access, and substandard customer service.
CADE – itself a coalition of numerous California digital equity activists and groups (including ILSR) – has fired off a letter to lawmakers warning them that they’re on the cusp of destroying an historic opportunity to expand and improve broadband access and affordability across The Golden State. (CADE is also encouraging opponents of the bill to sign-on to its opposition letter here).
“None of this information nor our suggestions or requests were considered,” the groups said. “Instead, amendments resulting from closed-door negotiations with industry were accepted on the Assembly floor, which ultimately gutted the bill and abandoned the struggling California families it was meant to serve.”
In recent months the federal government under the Trump administration has abandoned any pretense that it cares about broadband affordability.
In less than a year Republican lawmakers have dismantled the FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Program, killed a program that provided free Wi-Fi to poor rural school-children, and dismantled the Digital Equity Act – a Congress-sanctioned law taking aim at longstanding digital discrimination in affordable broadband access.
The federal abandonment of the public interest has opened the door wide to greater state leadership on equitable broadband affordability. In the wake of New York State’s affordability law, Massachusetts, Vermont and Minnesota are pursuing similar legislation.
This potential is ruined if state legislators refuse to steel themselves to the relentless lobbying efforts by giant telecom monopolies very keen to keep the broken – but extremely profitable – status quo intact.
Listen Shayna Englin with the California Community Foundation discuss the California broadband affordability bill on our recent Connect This! episode below:
Header image of legislation change sticky note next to keyboard courtesy of Pix4Free, Creative Commons, Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
Inline image of CADE advocacy at California statehouse courtesy of CADE
Inline image of no lobbying sign courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
Inline image of Monopoly man street art courtesy of aisletwentytwo on Flickr, Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
