The GOP leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee want NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson to assure them that NTIA’s BEAD program is not violating the law by allowing states to regulate broadband rates. In a letter to Davidson, Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) said Davidson gave “troubling” answers concerning this question during the December 5 oversight hearing.
“The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which created the BEAD Program, explicitly prohibits … NTIA from ‘regulat[ing] the rates charged for broadband service,’” wrote the lawmakers. “During Senate floor debate on this legislation, members of Congress agreed that this language meant that ‘no rate regulation of broadband services would be authorized or permitted by NTIA or the Assistant Secretary who leads NTIA as part of the state broadband grant program.’”
Latta and Rodgers note that Davidson said during his testimony that NTIA would not regulate rates; however he “did not foreclose approval of state plans that regulated rates of broadband service.” Indeed, when directly asked, ‘Will NTIA permit a state to rate regulate, yes or no,’ you did not provide a yes or no answer and instead stated that NTIA would give states flexibility on how to approach this issue,” they wrote.
This “flexibility” to pursue rate regulation is not only concerning, but is strictly prohibited, asserted Latta and Rodgers. They called Davidson’s responses “extremely problematic,” and noted that some states, like California, have submitted initial BEAD proposals that include some form of rate regulation.
They say there appears to be some confusion about the definition of rate regulation. The lawmakers define it as “regulating the rate of broadband services in any way, including setting a rate, freezing rates, or placing a cap on rates.”
Latta and Rodgers asked Davidson to confirm whether NTIA will approve state plans that include rate regulation, as defined in the letter. “If NTIA plans to approve these plans, we also ask that you provide an explanation of why you and the Biden Administration are ignoring the IIJA,” they wrote. They request an answer by January 12, 2024.
By Leslie Stimson, Inside Towers Washington Bureau Chief
Reader Interactions