.

Broadband Internet Access and the Digital
Divide: Federal Assistance Programs
Lennard G. Kruger
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Angele A. Gilroy
Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
October 30, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL30719

c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Summary
The “digital divide” is a term that has been used to characterize a gap between “information haves
and have-nots,” or in other words, between those Americans who use or have access to
telecommunications and information technologies and those who do not. One important subset of
the digital divide debate concerns high-speed Internet access and advanced telecommunications
services, also known as broadband. Broadband is provided by a series of technologies (e.g., cable,
telephone wire, fiber, satellite, wireless) that give users the ability to send and receive data at
volumes and speeds far greater than traditional “dial-up” Internet access over telephone lines.
Broadband technologies are currently being deployed primarily by the private sector throughout
the United States. While the numbers of new broadband subscribers continue to grow, studies and
data suggest that the rate of broadband deployment in urban/suburban and high income areas is
outpacing deployment in rural and low-income areas. Some policymakers, believing that
disparities in broadband access across American society could have adverse economic and social
consequences on those left behind, assert that the federal government should play a more active
role to avoid a “digital divide” in broadband access.
With the conclusion of the grant and loan awards established by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5), there remain two ongoing federal vehicles which direct
federal money to fund broadband infrastructure: the broadband and telecommunications programs
at the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Universal
Service Fund (USF) programs under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Although
the USF’s High Cost Program does not explicitly fund broadband infrastructure, subsidies are
used, in many cases, to upgrade existing telephone networks so that they are capable of delivering
high-speed services. Additionally, subsidies provided by USF’s Schools and Libraries Program
and Rural Health Care Program are used for a variety of telecommunications services, including
broadband access. Currently the USF is undergoing a major transition to the Connect America
Fund, which is targeted to the deployment, adoption, and utilization of both fixed and mobile
broadband.
To the extent that Congress may consider various options for further encouraging broadband
deployment and adoption, a key issue is how to strike a balance between providing federal
assistance for unserved and underserved areas where the private sector may not be providing
acceptable levels of broadband service, while at the same time minimizing any deleterious effects
that government intervention in the marketplace may have on competition and private sector
investment.

Congressional Research Service
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Status of Broadband Deployment in the United States .................................................................... 1
Broadband in Rural Areas ................................................................................................................ 7
Broadband and the Federal Role ...................................................................................................... 8
The National Broadband Plan ................................................................................................... 9
Current Federal Broadband Programs ........................................................................................... 11
Rural Utilities Service Programs ............................................................................................. 11
The Universal Service Concept and the FCC .......................................................................... 12
Universal Service and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ............................................ 12
Universal Service and Broadband ..................................................................................... 14
Legislation in the 110th Congress ................................................................................................... 15
Legislation in the 111th Congress ................................................................................................... 16
P.L. 111-5: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ...................................... 16
Other Enacted Broadband Legislation in the 111th Congress .................................................. 17
Legislation in the 112th Congress ................................................................................................... 17
Legislation in the 113th Congress ................................................................................................... 19
Concluding Observations ............................................................................................................... 20

Tables
Table 1. Percentage of Broadband Technologies by Types of Connection ...................................... 2
Table 2. Percentage of Households With Broadband Connections by State .................................... 2
Table 3. Americans Without Access to Fixed Broadband by State .................................................. 4
Table 4. Selected Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Related to Broadband and
Telecommunications Development............................................................................................. 21

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 26

Congressional Research Service
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Introduction
The “digital divide” is a term used to describe a perceived gap between “information haves and
have-nots,” or in other words, between those Americans who use or have access to
telecommunications and information technologies and those who do not.1 Whether or not
individuals or communities fall into the “information haves” category depends on a number of
factors, ranging from the presence of computers in the home, to training and education, to the
availability of affordable Internet access.
Broadband technologies are currently being deployed primarily by the private sector throughout
the United States. While the numbers of new broadband subscribers continue to grow, studies and
data suggest that the rate of broadband deployment in urban/suburban and high income areas is
outpacing deployment in rural and low-income areas.
Status of Broadband Deployment in the
United States
Prior to the late 1990s, American homes accessed the Internet at maximum speeds of 56 kilobits
per second by dialing up an Internet Service Provider (such as AOL) over the same copper
telephone line used for traditional voice service. A relatively small number of businesses and
institutions used broadband or high speed connections through the installation of special
“dedicated lines” typically provided by their local telephone company. Starting in the late 1990s,
cable television companies began offering cable modem broadband service to homes and
businesses. This was accompanied by telephone companies beginning to offer DSL service
(broadband over existing copper telephone wireline). Growth has been steep, rising from 2.8
million high speed lines reported as of December 1999, to 293 million connections as of
December 31, 2013.2 Of the 293 million high speed connections reported by the FCC, 247 million
serve residential users.3
Table 1 depicts the relative deployment of different types of broadband technologies. A
distinction is often made between “current generation” and “next generation” broadband
(commonly referred to as next generation networks or NGN). “Current generation” typically
refers to currently deployed cable, DSL, and many wireless systems, while “next generation”
refers to dramatically faster download and upload speeds offered by fiber technologies and also
by successive generations of cable, DSL, and wireless technologies.4 In general, the greater the

1 The term “digital divide” can also refer to international disparities in access to communications and information
technology. This report focuses on domestic issues only.
2 FCC, Internet Access Services: Status as of December 31, 2013, released October 2014, p. 17. Available at
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1016/DOC-329973A1.pdf.
3 Ibid.
4 Initially, and for many years following, the FCC defined broadband (or more specifically “high-speed lines”) as over
200 kilobits per second (kbps) in at least one direction, which was roughly four times the speed of conventional dialup
Internet access. In recent years, the 200 kbps threshold was considered too low, and on March 19, 2008, the FCC
adopted a report and order (FCC 08-89) establishing new categories of broadband speed tiers for data collection
purposes. Specifically, 200 kbps to 768 kbps is considered “first generation,” 768 kbps to 1.5 Mbps is “basic broadband
tier 1,” and increasingly higher speed tiers are broadband tiers 2 through 7 (tier seven is greater than or equal to 100
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
1
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

download and upload speeds offered by a broadband connection, the more sophisticated (and
potentially valuable) the application that is enabled.
Table 1. Percentage of Broadband Technologies by Types of Connection
Residential
Residential
Connections at
connections at
Connections over
connections over
least 3 Mbps
least 3 Mbps
200 kbps in at
200 kbps in at
downstream and
downstream and
least one
least one
768 kbps
768 kbps

direction
direction
upstream
upstream
cable
modem 18.4% 20.5% 23.8% 26.3%
DSL
10.5%
11.0%
8.8%
9.3%
Mobile wireless
67.3%
64.5%
63.0%
59.7%
Fiber
2.6%
2.9%
3.5%
3.9%
Al other
1.2%
1.0%
0.9%
0.9%
Source: FCC, Internet Access Services: Status as of December 31, 2013, pp. 23-26.
Based on the latest FCC broadband connection data, Table 2 shows the percentages of
households with broadband connections by state, both for download connections over 200 kbps
and for connections of at least 3 Mbps (which approximates the FCC’s National Broadband
Availability target). According to the FCC, high speed connections over 200 kbps are reported in
72% of households nationwide, while connections of at least 3 Mbps (download) and 768 kbps
(upload) are reported in 60% of households nationwide.
Table 2. Percentage of Households With Broadband Connections by State
(as of December 31, 2013)
Connections at least 3
Connections over
mbps downstream and

200 kbps
768 kbps upstream
Alabama
60%
40%
Alaska 72%
47%
Arizona 73%
63%
Arkansas 55%
36%
California 78%
65%
Colorado 79%
69%
Connecticut 79%
68%
Delaware 80%
73%
District of Columbia
74%
69%
Florida 78%
63%

(...continued)
Mbps in any one direction). Tiers can change as technology advances.
Congressional Research Service
2
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Connections at least 3
Connections over
mbps downstream and

200 kbps
768 kbps upstream
Georgia 67%
52%
Hawai 84%
81%
Idaho 68%
48%
Illinois 71%
57%
Indiana 67%
52%
Iowa 68%
32%
Kansas 71%
52%
Kentucky 65%
49%
Louisiana 63%
42%
Maine 77%
67%
Maryland 77%
73%
Massachusetts 83%
79%
Michigan
69%
58%
Minnesota 72%
57%
Mississippi 51%
31%
Missouri 65%
47%
Montana 68%
46%
Nebraska 71%
59%
Nevada 70%
58%
New Hampshire
84%
77%
New Jersey
84%
80%
New Mexico
61%
46%
New York
81%
77%
North Carolina
72%
58%
North Dakota
75%
58%
Ohio 73%
61%
Oklahoma 62%
44%
Oregon 73%
63%
Pennsylvania 74%
65%
Rhode Island
78%
74%
South Carolina
69%
55%
South Dakota
70%
58%
Tennessee 61%
50%
Texas 69%
56%
Utah
76%
66%
Vermont 81%
71%
Congressional Research Service
3
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Connections at least 3
Connections over
mbps downstream and

200 kbps
768 kbps upstream
Virginia 72%

66%
Washington 76%
68%
West Virginia
64%
57%
Wisconsin 70%
56%
Wyoming 68%
49%
National subscribership ratio
72%
60%
Source: FCC, Internet Access Services: Status as of December 31, 2013, pp. 34-35.
Notes: Subscribership ratio is the number of reported residential high speed lines (broadband connections)
divided by the number of households in each state.
Meanwhile, the National Broadband Map, which is composed of state broadband data and
compiled by NTIA, provides data on where broadband is and is not available. The latest update of
these data indicate that 99.3% of the U.S. population have available advertised speeds of at least 3
Mbps (download) and 768 kbps (upload), 99.0% have download speeds 6 Mbps or greater, and
98.7% have download speeds 10 Mbps or greater.5 The FCC’s Eighth Broadband Progress
Report, released on August 21, 2012, used National Broadband Map data to estimate that 19
million Americans living in 7 million households lack access to fixed broadband at speeds of 4
Mbps (download)/1 Mbps (upload) or greater.6 Table 3 shows a state-by-state breakdown of the
percentage of population without access to fixed broadband at the FCC’s benchmark speed of 4
Mbps/1Mbps.
Table 3. Americans Without Access to Fixed Broadband by State
(access to speeds of at least 4 Mbps download/1 Mbps upload)
% of population
% of population
% of population
without access,
without access, rural

without access
nonrural areas
areas
United States
6.0% 1.8% 23.7%
Alabama 11.4%
1.6%
25.5%
Alaska 19.6%
4.4%
48.9%
Arizona 4.7%
1.2%
35.8%
Arkansas 13.6%
1.8%
28.8%
California 3.3%
1.6%
35.2%
Colorado 4.3%
1.0%
25.3%
Connecticut 0.7% 0.5% 2.6%
Delaware 3.1%
1.1%
13.0%

5 NTIA, Broadband Statistics Report, data as of December 2013, released July 2014, pp. 3-4, available at
http://www.broadbandmap.gov/download/Technology%20by%20Speed.pdf.
6 Federal Communications Commission, Eighth Broadband Progress Report, FCC 12-90, released August 21, 2012, p.
29, available at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0827/FCC-12-90A1.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

% of population
% of population
% of population
without access,
without access, rural

without access
nonrural areas
areas
Utah
1.8%
0.3%
16.7%
Vermont 9.4%
0.2%
15.2%
Virginia 10.9%
2.2%
37.6%
Washington 3.2% 0.5%
17.4%
West
Virginia 45.9% 31.4% 59.8%
Wisconsin 6.9%
0.1%
23.0%
Wyoming 13.2%
1.1%
35.4%
U.S. Territories
54.0% 41.5% 85.2%
American
Samoa
78.6% 30.9% 92.0%
Northern
Marianas
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Guam 54.3%
0.1%
76.1%
Puerto
Rico 51.6% 40.3% 84.8%
U.S. Virgin Islands
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Source: FCC, Eighth Broadband Progress Report, Appendix C.
In contrast to broadband availability, which refers to whether or not broadband service is offered,
broadband adoption refers to the extent to which American households actually subscribe to and
use broadband. The U.S. Department of Commerce, based on October 2012 survey data, found
that 72.4% of U.S. households have adopted broadband.7 Similarly, the FCC’s Eighth Broadband
Progress Report found that 64% of American households with broadband available to them adopt
broadband service offering speeds faster than 768 kbps/200 kbps, while 40% adopt speeds faster
than the FCC benchmark of 4 Mbps/1Mbps. The FCC found that the “broadband adoption rates
for American households are lower, on average, in the counties with the lowest median household
income, in areas outside of urban areas, on Tribal lands, and in U.S. Territories.”8
According to the Department of Commerce report Exploring the Digital Nation: America’s
Emerging Online Experience (based on July 2011 U.S. Census Bureau survey data), the three
main reasons cited for not having broadband at home are that it is perceived as not needed, too
expensive, and lack of a home computer.9 The Department of Commerce report, the FCC’s
National Broadband Plan, and a survey conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life
Project10 also found disparities in broadband adoption among demographic groups. Populations

7 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Blog, “Household
Broadband Adoption Climbs to 72.4 Percent,” June 6, 2013, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2013/household-
broadband-adoption-climbs-724-percent.
8 Eighth Broadband Progress Report, p. 54.
9 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Exploring the Digital
Nation: America’s Emerging Online Experience, June 2013, p. 26, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/
publications/exploring_the_digital_nation_-_americas_emerging_online_experience.pdf.
10 Smith, Aaron, Pew Internet & American Life Project, Home Broadband 2010, August 11, 2010, available at
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/Home%20broadband%202010.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
6
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

continuing to lag behind in broadband adoption include people with low incomes, seniors,
minorities, the less-educated, non-family households, and the non-employed.
Broadband in Rural Areas11
While the number of new broadband subscribers continues to grow, the rate of broadband
deployment in urban areas appears to be outpacing deployment in rural areas. While there are
many examples of rural communities with state of the art telecommunications facilities,12 recent
surveys and studies have indicated that, in general, rural areas tend to lag behind urban and
suburban areas in broadband deployment. For example:
• According to 2013 survey data from the Pew Research Center, 70% of adults in
urban areas said they have a high-speed broadband connection at home, as
opposed to 62% of adults in rural areas.13
• A study commissioned by the National Agricultural & Rural Development Policy
Center noted a persistent 13 percentage point gap in broadband adoption between
metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas between 2003 and 2010.14
• The Department of Commerce report, Exploring the Digital Nation: America’s
Emerging Online Experience, found that while the digital divide between urban
and rural areas has lessened since 2007, it still persists with 72% of urban
households adopting broadband service in 2011, compared to 58% of rural
households.15
• According to December 2013 data from the National Broadband Map, 94% of
the population in urban areas have access to available broadband download
speeds of at least 25 Mbps, as opposed to 51% of the population in rural areas.16
The comparatively lower population density of rural areas is likely the major reason why
broadband is less deployed than in more highly populated suburban and urban areas. Particularly
for wireline broadband technologies—such as cable modem and DSL—the greater the
geographical distances among customers, the larger the cost to serve those customers. Thus, there
is often less incentive for companies to invest in broadband in rural areas than, for example, in an

11 For more information on rural broadband and broadband programs at the Rural Utilities Service, see CRS Report
RL33816, Broadband Loan and Grant Programs in the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service, by Lennard G. Kruger.
12 See for example: National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA), Trends 2006: Making Progress With Broadband,
2006, 26 p. Available at http://www.neca.org/media/trends_brochure_website.pdf.
13 Home Broadband 2013, p. 3.
14 Brian Whiteacre, Roberto Gallardo, and Sharon Strover, National Agricultural & Rural Development Policy Center,
Rural Broadband Availability and Adoption: Evidence, Policy Challenges, and Options, March 2013, p. 13, available
at http://www.nardep.info/Broadband_2.html.
15 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Exploring the
Digital Nation: America’s Emerging Online Experience, June 2013, p. 26, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/
ntia/publications/exploring_the_digital_nation_-_americas_emerging_online_experience.pdf.
16 NTIA, National Broadband Map, Broadband Statistics Report: Broadband Availability in Urban vs. Rural Areas,
July 2014, p. 7, available at http://www.broadbandmap.gov/download/
Broadband%20Availability%20in%20Rural%20vs%20Urban%20Areas.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

urban area where there is more demand (more customers with perhaps higher incomes) and less
cost to wire the market area.17
Some policymakers believe that disparities in broadband access across American society could
have adverse consequences on those left behind, and that advanced telecommunications
applications critical for businesses and consumers to engage in e-commerce are increasingly
dependent on high speed broadband connections to the Internet. Thus, some say, communities and
individuals without access to broadband could be at risk to the extent that connectivity becomes a
critical factor in determining future economic development and prosperity. A February 2006 study
done by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for the Economic Development
Administration of the Department of Commerce marked the first attempt to quantitatively
measure the impact of broadband on economic growth. The study found that “between 1998 and
2002, communities in which mass-market broadband was available by December 1999
experienced more rapid growth in employment, the number of businesses overall, and businesses
in IT-intensive sectors, relative to comparable communities without broadband at that time.”18
A June 2007 report from the Brookings Institution found that for every one percentage point
increase in broadband penetration in a state, employment is projected to increase by 0.2% to 0.3%
per year. For the entire U.S. private non-farm economy, the study projected an increase of about
300,000 jobs.19
Subsequently, a July 2009 study commissioned by the Internet Innovation Alliance found net
consumer benefits of home broadband on the order of $32 billion per year, up from an estimated
$20 billion in consumer benefits from home broadband in 2005.20
Broadband and the Federal Role
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104) addressed the issue of whether the federal
government should intervene to prevent a “digital divide” in broadband access. Section 706
requires the FCC to determine whether “advanced telecommunications capability [i.e., broadband
or high-speed access] is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.”
Since 1999, the FCC has adopted and released eight reports pursuant to Section 706. The first five
reports formally concluded that the deployment of advanced telecommunications capability to all
Americans is reasonable and timely. Unlike the first five 706 reports, the sixth, seventh, and

17 The terrain of rural areas can also be a hindrance to broadband deployment because it is more expensive to deploy
broadband technologies in a mountainous or heavily forested area. An additional added cost factor for remote areas can
be the expense of “backhaul” (e.g., the “middle mile”) which refers to the installation of a dedicated line which
transmits a signal to and from an Internet backbone which is typically located in or near an urban area.
18 Gillett, Sharon E., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Measuring Broadband’s Economic Impact, report
prepared for the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, February 28, 2006, p. 4.
19 Crandall, Robert, William Lehr, and Robert Litan, The Effects of Broadband Deployment on Output and
Employment: A Cross-sectional Analysis of U.S. Data, June 2007, 20 pp. Available at http://www3.brookings.edu/
views/papers/crandall/200706litan.pdf.
20 Mark Dutz, Jonathan Orszag, and Robert Willig, The Substantial Consumer Benefits of Broadband Connectivity for
U.S. Households, Internet Innovation Alliance, July 2009, p. 4, http://internetinnovation.org/files/special-reports/
CONSUMER_BENEFITS_OF_BROADBAND.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
8
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

eighth reports concluded that broadband is not being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable
and timely fashion. According to the Eighth Broadband Progress Report:
Our analysis shows that the nation’s broadband deployment gap remains significant and is
particularly pronounced for Americans living in rural areas and on Tribal lands. We find that
as of June 30, 2011, approximately 19 million Americans did not have access to fixed
broadband. Significantly, approximately 76 percent of these Americans reside in rural areas.
Our analysis further shows that Americans residing on Tribal lands disproportionately lack
access to fixed broadband. And the available international broadband data, though not
perfectly comparable to U.S. data, suggest that the availability and deployment of broadband
in the United States may lag behind a number of other developed countries in certain
respects, although we also compare favorably to some developed countries in other respects.
Moreover, as many as 80 percent of E-rate recipients say that their broadband connections do
not fully meet their needs, and 78 percent of recipients say that they need additional
bandwidth. These data combined with our findings concerning availability above provide
further indication that broadband is not yet being reasonably and timely deployed to all
Americans.21
FCC Commissioners Robert McDowell and Ajit Pai issued dissenting statements, maintaining
that there is insufficient justification for the 706 report conclusion that broadband is not being
deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion. For example, the dissents argued that the report did
not sufficiently account for the dramatic growth in the availability and deployment of mobile
broadband, and that gaps in broadband adoption should not be used to determine whether or not
broadband is being sufficiently deployed.22
The National Broadband Plan
As mandated by the ARRA, on March 16, 2010, the FCC publically released its report,
Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan.23 The National Broadband Plan (NBP) seeks
to “create a high-performance America,” which the FCC defines as “a more productive, creative,
efficient America in which affordable broadband is available everywhere and everyone has the
means and skills to use valuable broadband applications.”24 In order to achieve this mission, the
NBP recommends that the country set six goals for 2020:
• Goal No. 1: At least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable access to
actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and actual upload
speeds of at least 50 megabits per second.
• Goal No. 2: The United States should lead the world in mobile innovation, with
the fastest and most extensive wireless networks of any nation.
• Goal No. 3: Every American should have affordable access to robust broadband
service, and the means and skills to subscribe if they so choose.

21 Eighth Broadband Progress Report, p. 59-60.
22 Ibid., p.171, 177.
23 Available at http://www.broadband.gov/plan/. For more information on the National Broadband Plan, see CRS
Report R41324, The National Broadband Plan, by Lennard G. Kruger et al.
24 Federal Communications Commission, Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, March 17, 2010, p. 9.
Congressional Research Service
9
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

• Goal No. 4: Every American community should have affordable access to at least
1 gigabit per second broadband service to anchor institutions such as schools,
hospitals, and government buildings.
• Goal No. 5: To ensure the safety of the American people, every first responder
should have access to a nationwide, wireless, interoperable broadband public
safety network.
• Goal No. 6: To ensure that America leads in the clean energy economy, every
American should be able to use broadband to track and manage their real-time
energy consumption.
The National Broadband Plan is categorized into three parts:
• Part I (Innovation and Investment), which “discusses recommendations to
maximize innovation, investment and consumer welfare, primarily through
competition. It then recommends more efficient allocation and management of
assets government controls or influences.”25 The recommendations address a
number of issues, including spectrum policy, improved broadband data
collection, broadband performance standards and disclosure, special access rates,
interconnection, privacy and cybersecurity, child online safety, poles and rights-
of-way, research and experimentation (R&E) tax credits, and R&D funding.
• Part II (Inclusion), which “makes recommendations to promote inclusion—to
ensure that all Americans have access to the opportunities broadband can
provide.”26 Issues include reforming the Universal Service Fund, intercarrier
compensation, federal assistance for broadband in Tribal lands, expanding
existing broadband grant and loan programs at the Rural Utilities Service,
enabling greater broadband connectivity in anchor institutions, and improved
broadband adoption and utilization especially among disadvantaged and
vulnerable populations.
• Part III (National Purposes), which “makes recommendations to maximize the
use of broadband to address national priorities. This includes reforming laws,
policies and incentives to maximize the benefits of broadband in areas where
government plays a significant role.”27 National purposes include health care,
education, energy and the environment, government performance, civic
engagement, and public safety. Issues include telehealth and health IT, online
learning and modernizing educational broadband infrastructure, digital literacy
and job training, smart grid and smart buildings, federal support for broadband in
small businesses, telework within the federal government, cybersecurity and
protection of critical broadband infrastructure, copyright of public digital media,
interoperable public safety communications, next generation 911 networks, and
emergency alert systems.
The release of the National Broadband Plan is seen by many as a precursor towards the
development of a national broadband policy—whether comprehensive or piecemeal—that will

25 Ibid., p. 11.
26 Ibid.
27 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
10
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

likely be shaped and developed by Congress, the FCC, and the Administration.28 Congress will
likely play a major role in implementing the National Broadband Plan, both by considering
legislation to implement NBP recommendations, and by overseeing broadband activities
conducted by the FCC and executive branch agencies.
Current Federal Broadband Programs
With the conclusion of grant and loan awards established by the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5),29 there remain two ongoing federal vehicles which direct
federal money to fund broadband infrastructure: the broadband and telecommunications programs
at the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Universal
Service Fund (USF) programs under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Although
the USF’s High Cost Program does not explicitly fund broadband infrastructure, subsidies are
used, in many cases, to upgrade existing telephone networks so that they are capable of delivering
high-speed services. Additionally, subsidies provided by USF’s Schools and Libraries Program
and Rural Health Care Program are used for a variety of telecommunications services, including
broadband access. Currently the USF is undergoing a major transition to the Connect America
Fund, which is targeted to the deployment, adoption, and use of both fixed and mobile broadband.
Table 4 (at the end of this report) shows selected federal domestic assistance programs
throughout the federal government that currently can be associated with broadband and
telecommunications development. The table categorizes the programs in three ways: programs
exclusively devoted to the deployment of broadband infrastructure; programs which have
traditionally focused on deployment of telecommunications infrastructure generally (which
typically can and does include broadband); and applications-specific programs which fund some
aspect of broadband access or adoption as a means towards supporting a particular application,
such as distance learning or telemedicine.
Rural Utilities Service Programs
RUS implements two programs specifically targeted at providing assistance for broadband
infrastructure deployment in rural areas: the Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee
Program and Community Connect Broadband Grants.30 The 110th Congress reauthorized and
reformed the Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee program as part of the 2008
farm bill (P.L. 110-234). The 112th Congress considered reauthorization of the program as part of
the 2012 farm bill.31
RUS also has a rural telephone loan program (dating back to 1949, now called
Telecommunications Infrastructure Loans) that has historically supported infrastructure for

28 See for example, Office of Science and Technology Policy and National Economic Council, The White House, Four
Years of Broadband Growth, June 2013, 26 pages, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
broadband_report_final.pdf.
29 See CRS Report R40436, Broadband Infrastructure Programs in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, by
Lennard G. Kruger.
30 For more information on these programs, see CRS Report RL33816, Broadband Loan and Grant Programs in the
USDA’s Rural Utilities Service, by Lennard G. Kruger.
31 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
11
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

telephone voice service, but has now evolved into support for broadband-capable service
provided by traditional telephone borrowers. Additionally, the Distance Learning and
Telemedicine Grant Program supports broadband-based applications.32
The Universal Service Concept and the FCC33
Since its creation in 1934 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been tasked with
“mak[ing] available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States ... a rapid, efficient,
Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service with adequate facilities at
reasonable charges.”34 This mandate led to the development of what has come to be known as the
universal service concept.
The universal service concept, as originally designed, called for the establishment of policies to
ensure that telecommunications services are available to all Americans, including those in rural,
insular and high cost areas, by ensuring that rates remain affordable. Over the years this concept
fostered the development of various FCC policies and programs to meet this goal. The FCC offers
universal service support through a number of direct mechanisms that target both providers of and
subscribers to telecommunications and, more recently, broadband services.35
Universal Service and the Telecommunications Act of 1996
Passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104) codified the long-standing
commitment by U.S. policymakers to ensure universal service in the provision of
telecommunications services.
The Schools and Libraries, and Rural Health Care Programs
Congress, through the 1996 act, not only codified, but also expanded the concept of universal
service to include, among other principles, that elementary and secondary schools and
classrooms, libraries, and rural health care providers have access to telecommunications services
for specific purposes at discounted rates. (See §§254(b)(6) and 254(h) of the 1996
Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C. 254.)
1. The Schools and Libraries Program. Under universal service provisions contained in the 1996
act, elementary and secondary schools and classrooms and libraries are designated as
beneficiaries of universal service discounts. Universal service principles detailed in Section
254(b)(6) state that “Elementary and secondary schools and classrooms ... and libraries should
have access to advanced telecommunications services.” The act further requires in Section
254(h)(1)(B) that services within the definition of universal service be provided to elementary

32 See CRS Report R42524, Rural Broadband: The Roles of the Rural Utilities Service and the Universal Service Fund,
by Angele A. Gilroy and Lennard G. Kruger.
33 The section on universal service was prepared by Angele Gilroy, Specialist in Telecommunications, Resources,
Science and Industry Division. For more information on universal service, see CRS Report RL33979, Universal
Service Fund: Background and Options for Reform, by Angele A. Gilroy.
34 Communications Act of 1934, As Amended, Title I §1 [47 U.S.C. 151].
35 Many states participate in or have programs that mirror FCC universal service mechanisms to help promote universal
service goals within their states.
Congressional Research Service
12
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

and secondary schools and libraries for education purposes at discounts, that is at “rates less than
the amounts charged for similar services to other parties.”
The FCC established the Schools and Libraries Division within the Universal Service
Administrative Company (USAC) to administer the schools and libraries or “E (education)-rate”
program to comply with these provisions. Under this program, eligible schools and libraries
receive discounts ranging from 20% to 90% for telecommunications services depending on the
poverty level of the school’s (or school district’s) population and its location in a high cost
telecommunications area. The FCC established a funding ceiling, or cap, of $2.25 billion,
adjusted for inflation prospectively beginning with funding year 2010. Three categories of
services are eligible for discounts: internal connections (e.g., wiring, routers and servers); Internet
access; and telecommunications and dedicated services, with the third category receiving funding
priority. According to data released by program administrators, approximately $37.4 billion in
funding has been committed over the first 16 years (funding years 1998-2013) of the program
with funding released to all states, the District of Columbia and all territories. Funding
commitments for funding Year 2014 (July 1, 2014-June 30, 2015) totaled $2.6 billion as of
September 17, 2014.36
2. The Rural Health Care Programs. Section 254(h) of the 1996 act requires that public and
nonprofit rural health care providers have access to telecommunications services necessary for the
provision of health care services at rates comparable to those paid for similar services in urban
areas. Subsection 254(h)(1) further specifies that “to the extent technically feasible and
economically reasonable” health care providers should have access to advanced
telecommunications and information services. The FCC established the Rural Health Care
Division (RHCD) within the USAC to administer the universal support program to comply with
these provisions. Under FCC established rules only public or nonprofit health care providers are
eligible to receive funding. Eligible health care providers, with the exception of those requesting
only access to the Internet, must also be located in a rural area. The funding ceiling, or cap, for
this support was established at $400 million annually. The funding level for Year One of the
program (January 1998-June 30, 1999) was set at $100 million. Due to less than anticipated
demand, the FCC established a $12 million funding level for the second year (July 1, 1999 to
June 30, 2000) of the program but has since returned to a $400 million yearly cap. As of March
31, 2012, a total of $514.3 million has been committed since the program’s inception in 1998.
The primary use of the funding is to provide reduced rates for telecommunications and
information services necessary for the provision of health care.37 In addition, the FCC established,
in 2007, the “Rural Health Care Pilot Program” to help public and nonprofit health care providers
build state and region-wide broadband networks dedicated to the provision of health care
services. There are 50 projects in the program with $387.9 million in authorized funds. As of
February 29, 2010, $232.6 million of the funds have been committed to the 50 FCC designated
projects. The FCC in a December 12, 2012, order, created a new program, the Healthcare Connect
Fund, which will expand health care provider access to broadband, particularly in rural areas, and
replace the Rural Health Care Pilot Program with a permanent program. Non-rural participation is
limited to consortia of which at least 50% must be located in a rural area. The upfront funding cap
for the Healthcare Connect Fund is $150 million annually and participants will be required to

36 For additional information on this program, including funding commitments, see the E-rate website:
http://www.universalservice.org/sl/.
37 For additional information on this program, including funding commitments, see the RHCD website:
http://www.universalservice.org/rhc/.
Congressional Research Service
13
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

contribute 35% of the costs. The FCC also established, as part of the Healthcare Connect Fund, a
new pilot program, to expand broadband connections to skilled nursing facilities. Funding for this
pilot program, which will begin in 2014, will be up to $50 million total over three years. The total
funding cap for all of the above mentioned USF rural health care programs will remain at $400
million annually.38
Universal Service and Broadband
One of the policy debates surrounding universal service in the last decade was whether access to
advanced telecommunications services (i.e., broadband) should be incorporated into universal
service objectives. The term universal service, when applied to telecommunications, refers to the
ability to make available a basket of telecommunications services to the public, across the nation,
at a reasonable price. As directed in the 1996 Telecommunications Act (§254[c]) a federal-state
Joint Board was tasked with defining the services which should be included in the basket of
services to be eligible for federal universal service support; in effect using and defining the term
“universal service” for the first time. The Joint Board’s recommendation, which was subsequently
adopted by the FCC in May 1997, included the following in its universal service package: voice
grade access to and some usage of the public switched network; single line service; dual tone
signaling; access to directory assistance; emergency service such as 911; operator services; and
access and interexchange (long distance) service.
Some policy makers expressed concern that the FCC-adopted definition is too limited and does
not take into consideration the importance and growing acceptance of advanced services such as
broadband and Internet access. They point to a number of provisions contained in the Universal
Service section of the 1996 act to support their claim. Universal service principles contained in
Section 254(b)(2) state that “Access to advanced telecommunications services should be provided
to all regions of the Nation.” The subsequent principle (b)(3) calls for consumers in all regions of
the nation including “low-income” and those in “rural, insular, and high cost areas” to have
access to telecommunications and information services including “advanced services” at a
comparable level and a comparable rate charged for similar services in urban areas. Such
provisions, they state, dictate that the FCC expand its universal service definition.
The 1996 act does take into consideration the changing nature of the telecommunications sector
and allows for the universal service definition to be modified if future conditions warrant. Section
254(c)of the act states that “universal service is an evolving level of telecommunications
services” and the FCC is tasked with “periodically” reevaluating this definition “taking into
account advances in telecommunications and information technologies and services.”
Furthermore, the Joint Board is given specific authority to recommend “from time to time” to the
FCC modification in the definition of the services to be included for federal universal service
support. The Joint Board, on November 19, 2007, concluded such an inquiry and recommended
that the FCC change the mix of services eligible for universal service support. The Joint Board
recommended, among other things, that “the universal availability of broadband Internet

38 For more details on the USF rural health care support mechanism and the newly established Healthcare Connect
Fund see In the Matter of Rural Health Care Support Mechanism, WC Docket No. 02-60, Federal Communications
Commission, adopted December 12, 2012. Available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-
150A1.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
14
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

services” be included in the nation’s communications goals and hence be supported by federal
universal service funds.39
This debate was put to rest when provisions contained in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) called for the FCC to develop, and submit to Congress, a
national broadband plan to ensure that every American has “access to broadband capability.”40
The FCC in its national broadband plan, Connecting America: the National Broadband Plan,
recommended that access to and adoption of broadband be a national goal. Furthermore the
national broadband plan proposed that the Universal Service Fund be restructured to become a
vehicle to help reach this goal. The FCC, in an October 2011 decision, adopted an Order that calls
for the USF to be transformed, in stages, over a multi-year period, from a mechanism to support
voice telephone service to one that supports the deployment, adoption, and utilization of both
fixed and mobile broadband. This transformation includes the phase out of the USF’s legacy High
Cost Program and the creation of a new fund, the Connect America Fund, to replace it.41
Legislation in the 110th Congress
In the 110th Congress, legislation was enacted to provide financial assistance for broadband
deployment. Of particular note is the reauthorization of the Rural Utilities Service (RUS)
broadband loan program, which was enacted as part of the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-234). In
addition to reauthorizing and reforming the RUS broadband loan program, P.L. 110-234 contains
provisions establishing a National Center for Rural Telecommunications Assessment and
requiring the FCC and RUS to formulate a comprehensive rural broadband strategy.
The Broadband Data Improvement Act (P.L. 110-385) was enacted by the 110th Congress and
required the FCC to collect demographic information on unserved areas, data comparing
broadband service with 75 communities in at least 25 nations abroad, and data on consumer use
of broadband. The act also directed the Census Bureau to collect broadband data, the Government
Accountability Office to study broadband data metrics and standards, and the Department of
Commerce to provide grants supporting state broadband initiatives.
Meanwhile, the America COMPETES Act (H.R. 2272) was enacted (P.L. 110-69) and contained a
provision authorizing the National Science Foundation (NSF) to provide grants for basic research
in advanced information and communications technologies. Areas of research included affordable
broadband access, including wireless technologies. P.L. 110-69 also directs NSF to develop a plan
that describes the current status of broadband access for scientific research purposes.

39 The Joint Board recommended that the definition of those services that qualify for universal service support be
expanded and that the nation’s communications goals include the universal availability of: mobility services (i.e.,
wireless voice); broadband Internet services; and voice services at affordable and comparable rates for all rural and
non-rural areas. For a copy of this recommendation see http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07J-
4A1.pdf.
40 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, P.L. 111-5, Section 6001 (k)(2)(D).
41 For a detailed discussion of this Order and USF transition see CRS Report R42524, Rural Broadband: The Roles of
the Rural Utilities Service and the Universal Service Fund, by Angele A. Gilroy and Lennard G. Kruger.
Congressional Research Service
15
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Legislation in the 111th Congress
In the 111th Congress, legislation was enacted that sought to provide financial assistance for
broadband deployment. Of particular note, provisions in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) provided grants and loans to support broadband access and
adoption in unserved and underserved areas.
P.L. 111-5: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed P.L. 111-5, the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Broadband provisions of the ARRA provided a total of $7.2 billion,
for broadband grants, loans, and loan/grant combinations. The total consisted of $4.7 billion to
NTIA/DOC for a newly established Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (grants) and
$2.5 billion to the RUS/USDA Broadband Initiatives Program (grants, loans, and grant/loan
combinations).42
Regarding the $2.5 billion to RUS/USDA broadband programs, the ARRA specified that at least
75% of the area to be served by a project receiving funds shall be in a rural area without sufficient
access to high speed broadband service to facilitate economic development, as determined by the
Secretary of Agriculture. Priority was given to projects that provide service to the most rural
residents that do not have access to broadband services. Priority was also given to borrowers and
former borrowers of rural telephone loans.
Of the $4.7 billion appropriated to NTIA:
• $4.35 billion was directed to a competitive broadband grant program, of which
not less than $200 million shall be available for competitive grants for expanding
public computer center capacity (including at community colleges and public
libraries); not less than $250 million to encourage sustainable adoption of
broadband service; and $10 million transferred to the Department of Commerce
Office of Inspector General for audits and oversight; and
• $350 million was directed for funding the Broadband Data Improvement Act
(P.L. 110-385) and for the purpose of developing and maintaining a broadband
inventory map, which shall be made accessible to the public no later than two
years after enactment. Funds deemed necessary and appropriate by the Secretary
of Commerce may be transferred to the FCC for the purposes of developing a
national broadband plan, which shall be completed one year after enactment.
Final BTOP and BIP program awards were announced by September 30, 2010. For more
information on implementation of the broadband provisions of the ARRA, see CRS Report
R40436, Broadband Infrastructure Programs in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, by
Lennard G. Kruger. For information on the distribution and oversight of ARRA broadband grants
and loans, see CRS Report R41775, Background and Issues for Congressional Oversight of ARRA
Broadband Awards, by Lennard G. Kruger.

42 For information on existing broadband programs at RUS, see CRS Report RL33816, Broadband Loan and Grant
Programs in the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service, by Lennard G. Kruger.
Congressional Research Service
16
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Other Enacted Broadband Legislation in the 111th Congress
P.L. 111-8 (H.R. 1105). Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009. Appropriates to RUS/USDA $15.619
million to support a loan level of $400.487 million for the Rural Broadband Access Loan and
Loan Guarantee Program, and $13.406 million for the Community Connect Grant Program. To
the FCC, designates not less than $3 million to establish and administer a State Broadband Data
and Development matching grants program for state-level broadband demand aggregation
activities and creation of geographic inventory maps of broadband service to identify gaps in
service and provide a baseline assessment of statewide broadband deployment. Passed House
February 25, 2009. Passed Senate March 10, 2009. Signed by President, March 12, 2009.
P.L. 111-32 (H.R. 2346). Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009. Provides not less than $3
million to the FCC to develop a national broadband plan pursuant to the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009. Introduced May 12, 2009; referred to Committee on Appropriations.
Passed House May 14, 2009; passed Senate May 21, 2009. Signed by President, June 24, 2009.
P.L. 111-80 (H.R. 2997). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. For Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, provides $28.96 million to support a loan level of $400 million for the broadband
loan program, and $17.97 million for broadband community connect grants. Introduced June 23,
2009; referred to Committee on Appropriations. Reported by Committee on Appropriations June
23, 2009. Passed House July 9, 2009. Passed Senate August 4, 2009. Conference Report (H.Rept.
111-279) printed September 30, 2009. Signed by President October 21, 2009.
Legislation in the 112th Congress
The 112th Congress examined the efficacy of federal broadband assistance programs and how
they may fit into the context of a national broadband policy.
P.L. 112-10 (H.R. 1473). Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act,
2011. Rescinds existing unobligated past-year funding for the Rural Broadband Access Loan and
Loan Guarantee Program and the Community Connect Grants at the Rural Utilities Service. For
FY2011, appropriates $22.3 million to the Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee
Program for the cost of broadband loans, and $13.4 million to Community Connect Grants.
Signed by President, April 15, 2011.
P.L. 112-55 (H.R. 2112). Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012.
Provides FY2012 appropriations for Rural Utilities Service broadband loan program and
broadband community connect grants: $6 million for the broadband loan program (subsidizing a
loan level of $212 million) and $10.372 million for Community Connect grants. Introduced June
3, 2011; referred to Committee on Appropriations. Reported by Committee on Appropriations
June 3, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-101). Passed House June 16, 2011. Reported by Senate Appropriations
Committee September 7, 2011 (S.Rept. 112-73). Signed by President, November 18, 2011.
H.R. 1083 (Owens). Rural Broadband Initiative Act. Establishes an Office of Rural Broadband
Initiatives in the Department of Agriculture which would administer the RUS broadband loan and
grant programs, and would develop a comprehensive rural broadband strategy. Introduced March
15, 2011; referred to Committee on Agriculture and in addition to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
17
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

H.R. 1343 (Bass). To return unused or reclaimed funds made available for broadband awards in
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to the Treasury of the United States.
Introduced April 4, 2011; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce and to Committee on
Agriculture. Reported (amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H.Rept. 112-228)
on September 29, 2011. Passed House October 5, 2011. Referred to Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation October 6, 2011.
H.R. 1695 (Eshoo). Broadband Conduit Deployment Act of 2011. Directs the Secretary of
Transportation to require that broadband conduit be installed as part of certain highway
construction projects. Introduced May 3, 2011; referred to Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
H.R. 2163 (Matsui). Broadband Affordability Act of 2011. Amends the Communications Act of
1934 to establish a Lifeline Assistance Program for universal broadband adoption. Introduced
June 14, 2011; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.
H.R. 5973 (Kingston). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013. For Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, provides $2 million to support a loan level of $21 million for the broadband loan
program, and $10 million for broadband community connect grants. Introduced June 20, 2012;
referred to Committee on Appropriations. Reported by Committee on Appropriations June 20,
2012.
H.R. 6083 (Lucas). Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2012. Reauthorizes
rural broadband loan program at $25 million per year through FY2017. Introduced July 9, 2012;
referred to Committee on Agriculture. Ordered to be reported by committee July 11, 2012.
S. 257 (Landrieu). Small Business Broadband and Emerging Information Technology
Enhancement Act of 2011. Seeks to improve certain programs of the Small Business
Administration to better assist small business customers in accessing broadband technology.
Introduced February 2, 2011; referred to Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
S. 1659 (Ayotte). To return unused or reclaimed funds made available for broadband awards in
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to the Treasury of the United States.
Introduced October 5, 2011; referred to Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.
S. 1939 (Klobuchar). Broadband Conduit Deployment Act of 2011. Directs the Secretary of
Transportation to require that broadband conduit be installed as part of certain highway
construction projects. Introduced December 1, 2011; referred to Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
S. 2298 (Brown of Ohio). Connecting Rural America Act. Amends the Rural Electrification Act
of 1936 to improve the program of access to broadband telecommunications services in rural
areas. Introduced April 18, 2002; referred to Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
S. 2375 (Kohl). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013. For Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
provides $6 million to support a loan level of $63 million for the broadband loan program, and
$10 million for broadband community connect grants. Introduced April 26, 2012; referred to
Committee on Appropriations. Reported by Committee on Appropriations April 26, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
18
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

S. 3240 (Stabenow). Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012. Authorizes broadband loan
and grant program at $50 million per year through FY2017. Introduced May 24, 2012; referred to
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. Reported to Senate May 24, 2012. Passed
Senate (amended) June 21, 2012.
S. 3439 (Snowe). Federal Wi-Net Act. Directs the Administrator of General Services to install
Wi-Fi hotspots and wireless neutral host systems in all federal buildings in order to improve in-
building wireless communications coverage and commercial network capacity by offloading
wireless traffic onto wireline broadband networks. Introduced July 25, 2012; referred to
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Legislation in the 113th Congress
The following is a listing of broadband legislation directly related to the issue of federal
assistance for broadband deployment in unserved areas.43
P.L. 113-6 (H.R. 933). Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013.Funds the
broadband loan program at $4 million (supporting a loan level of approximately $42 million) and
the Community Connect grant program at $10.372 million. Signed by President March 26, 2013.
P.L. 113-79 (H.R. 2642). Agricultural Act of 2014. Reauthorizes the broadband loan and loan
guarantee program through FY2018 at $25 million per year. Signed by President February 7,
2014.
H.R. 1639 (Gibson). Amends the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 to authorize loan/grant
combinations under RUS broadband program. Introduced April 18, 2013; referred to Committee
on Agriculture and Committee on Energy and Commerce.
H.R. 1685 (Matsui). Broadband Adoption Act of 2013. Amends the Communications Act of
1934 to reform and modernize the Universal Service Fund Lifeline Assistance Program.
Introduced April 26, 2013; referred to Committee on Energy and Commerce.
H.R. 1947 (Lucas). Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013. Section
6105 would reauthorize the broadband loan and loan guarantee program through FY2018 at the
current level of $25 million per year. Introduced May 13, 2013; reported by Committees on
Agriculture and Judiciary.
H.R. 2410 (Aderholt). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014. Provides $5.5 million to subsidize a loan level of
$42.146 million for the broadband loan program, and $10.111 million for the Community
Connect grant program. Introduced June 18, 2013; reported by House Committee on
Appropriations (H.Rept. 113-116).
H.R. 4800 (Aderholt). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015. Provides $4.5 million to subsidize a loan level of

43 For information on public safety wireless broadband legislation, see CRS Report R41842, Funding Emergency
Communications: Technology and Policy Considerations, by Linda K. Moore.
Congressional Research Service
19
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

$24.077 million for the broadband loan program and $10.372 million for the Community Connect
grant program. Introduced June 4, 2014; reported by House Committee on Appropriations
(H.Rept. 113-468).
S. 954 (Stabenow). Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013. Includes the establishment
of a new grant program in combination with the existing loan and loan guarantee program
authorization, which is extended at $50 million per year through FY2018. Passed by Senate June
10, 2013.
S. 1244 (Pryor). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014. Provides $4 million to subsidize a loan level of $30.651
million for the broadband loan program, and $10.372 million for the Community Connect grant
program. Introduced June 27, 2013; reported by Senate Committee on Appropriations (S.Rept.
113-46).
S. 2389 (Pryor). Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015. Provides $6.435 million to subsidize a loan level of $34.43
million for the broadband loan program, and $10.372 million for the Community Connect grant
program. Introduced May 22, 2014; reported by Senate Committee on Appropriations (S.Rept.
113-164).
Concluding Observations
To the extent that Congress may consider various options for encouraging broadband deployment
and adoption, a key issue is how to strike a balance between providing federal assistance for
unserved and underserved areas where the private sector may not be providing acceptable levels
of broadband service, while at the same time minimizing any deleterious effects that government
intervention in the marketplace may have on competition and private sector investment.
In addition to loans, loan guarantees, and grants for broadband infrastructure deployment, a wide
array of policy instruments are available to policymakers, including universal service reform, tax
incentives to encourage private sector deployment, broadband bonds, demand-side incentives
(such as assistance to low income families for purchasing computers), regulatory and
deregulatory measures, and spectrum policy to spur roll-out of wireless broadband services. In
assessing federal incentives for broadband deployment, Congress may consider the appropriate
mix of broadband deployment incentives to create jobs in the short and long term, the extent to
which incentives should target next-generation broadband technologies, the extent to which
“underserved” areas with existing broadband providers should receive federal assistance, and
whether broadband stimulus projects are being efficiently managed and how they may fit into the
context of overall goals for a national broadband policy.
Congressional Research Service
20
c11173008

.

Table 4. Selected Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Related to Broadband and Telecommunications Development
Funding Amount
(FY2014 unless
Program Agency
Description

otherwise noted)
Web Links
Broadband Infrastructure Deployment Programs
Broadband Technology
National Telecommunications
Provides competitive grants to public and
$4 billion (ARRA,
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/
Opportunities Program
and Information
private sector entities in order to provide
P.L. 111-5) (2009)
broadbandgrants/
(BTOP)
Administration, Dept. of
broadband access in unserved and
Commerce
underserved areas; provide broadband
support and services to strategic institutions;
improve broadband access by public safety
agencies; and stimulate broadband demand,
economic growth, and job creation.
Broadband Initiatives
Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Provides competitive grants, loans, and
$2.5 billion for the
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/
Program (BIP)
Dept. of Agriculture
loan/grant combinations to public and
cost of loans,
utp_bip.html
private sector entities in order to provide
grants, and
broadband access in unserved and
loan/grant
underserved rural areas.
combinations
(ARRA, P.L. 111-5)
(2009)
Rural Broadband Access
Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Provides loan and loan guarantees for
$34 million for cost
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/
Loan and Loan Guarantee
Dept. of Agriculture
facilities and equipment providing broadband of money loans
utp_farmbill.html
Program
service in rural communities
Community Connect
Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Provides grants to applicants proposing to
$10 million
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/
Broadband Grants
Dept. of Agriculture
provide broadband service on a
utp_commconnect.html
“community-oriented connectivity” basis to
rural communities of under 20,000
inhabitants.
CRS-21
c11173008

.

Funding Amount
(FY2014 unless
Program Agency
Description

otherwise noted)
Web Links
Telecommunications Broadband Infrastructure Deployment Programs
Telecommunications
Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Provides long-term direct and guaranteed
$690 million
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/
Infrastructure Loan
Dept. of Agriculture
loans to qualified organizations for the
utp_infrastructure.html
Program
purpose of financing the improvement,

expansion, construction, acquisition, and
operation of telephone lines, facilities, or
systems to furnish and improve
telecommunications service in rural areas.
Al facilities financed must be capable of
supporting broadband services.
Distance Learning and
Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Provides seed money to rural community
$20 million
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/
Telemedicine Loans and
Dept. of Agriculture
facilities (e.g., schools, libraries, hospitals) for
UTP_DLT.html
Grants
advanced telecommunications systems that
can provide health care and educational
benefits to rural areas
Connect America
Federal Communications
Provides funding to eligible
$4.5 billion (annual y http://www.usac.org/hc/
Fund/Universal Service
Commission
telecommunications carriers to help pay for
through 2017)
High Cost Programa
telecommunications services in high-cost,
rural, and insular areas so that prices
charged to customers are reasonably
comparable across all regions of the nation.
Universal Service Schools
Federal Communications
Provides discounts for affordable
$2.25 billion
http://www.universalservice.org/sl/
and Libraries Program (i.e.,
Commission
telecommunications and Internet access
(annual y adjusted
E-rate)
services to ensure that schools and libraries
for inflation)
have access to affordable
telecommunications and information
services.
Healthcare Connect
Federal Communications
Provides a 65% discount on eligible expenses $400 million
http://www.usac.org/rhc/healthcare-
Fund/Universal Service
Commission
related to broadband connectivity to both
(annual y)
connect/
Rural Health Care
individual rural health care providers (HCPs)
Programb
and consortia, which can include non-rural
HCPs if the consortium has a majority of
rural sites.
CRS-22
c11173008

.

Funding Amount
(FY2014 unless
Program Agency
Description

otherwise noted)
Web Links
Appalachian Area
Appalachian Regional
Project grants to support self-sustaining
$73 million (2013) http://www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=
Development Program
Commission
economic development in the region’s most
21
distressed counties and areas. Includes funds
for a Telecommunications Initiative involving
projects that enable communities to
capitalize on broadband access.
States’ Economic
Delta Regional Authority
Grants for self-sustaining economic
$9.4 million
http://www.dra.gov/econom-devel/
Development Assistance
development projects of eight states in
application-steps.aspx
Program
Mississippi Delta region.
Investments for Public
Economic Development
Provides funding for construction of
$96 million
http://www.eda.gov/funding-
Works and Economic
Administration, Dept. of
infrastructure in areas that are not attractive
opportunities/
Development Facilities
Commerce
to private investment; most funding is for
water and sewer infrastructure but some
has been designated for telecommunications
and broadband projects.
Library Services and
Institute of Museum and
Provides funds for a wide range of library
$154 million
http://www.imls.gov/programs/
Technology Act Grants to
Library Services, National
services including installation of fiber and
programs.shtm
States
Foundation on the Arts and the wireless networks that provide access to
Humanities
library resources and services.
Native American Library
Institute of Museum and
Grants to support library services including
$4 million
http://www.imls.gov/applicants/grants/
Services
Library Services, National
electronically linking libraries to networks.
nativeAmerican.shtm
Foundation on the Arts and the
Humanities
CRS-23
c11173008

.

Funding Amount
(FY2014 unless
Program Agency
Description

otherwise noted)
Web Links
Programs Related to Applications of Broadband or Telecommunications Technology
Choice Neighborhood
Office of the Assistant
Helps communities transform
$120 million (2013) http://www.hud.gov/cn/
Implementation Grants
Secretary for Public and Indian
neighborhoods by revitalizing severely
Housing and Office of
distressed public and/or assisted housing.
Multifamily Housing Programs,
Grantees may use funds to provide unit-
Dept. of Housing and Urban
based broadband Internet connectivity.
Development
Special Education—
Office of Special Education and
Supports development and application of
$28 million
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/
Technology and Media
Rehabilitative Services, Dept. of technology and education media activities
osers/index.html?src=mr/
Services for Individuals
Education
for disabled children and adults
with Disabilities
Telehealth Network
Health Resources and Services
Grants to develop sustainable telehealth
$4.9 million
http://www.hrsa.gov/telehealth/
Grants
Administration, Department of
programs and networks in rural and frontier
Health and Human Services
areas, and in medically unserved areas and
populations.
Telehealth Resource
Health Resources and Services
Provides grants that support establishment
$4.5 million
http://www.hrsa.gov/telehealth/
Center Grant Program
Administration, Department of
and development of telehealth resource
Health and Human Services
centers to assist health care providers in the
development of telehealth services, including
decisions regarding the purchase of
advanced telecommunications services.
Evidence-Based Tele-
Health Resources and Services
Provides grants for rural or urban nonprofit
$2.0 million
http://www.hrsa.gov/telehealth/
Emergency Network Grant Administration, Department of
entities that will provide Tele-Emergency
Program
Health and Human Services
services through a telehealth network.
Licensure Portability Grant
Health Resources and Services
Provides support for state professional
$0.7 million
http://www.hrsa.gov/telehealth/
Program
Administration, Department of
licensing boards to develop and implement
Health and Human Services
state policies that will reduce statutory and
regulatory barriers to telemedicine.
Medical Library Assistance
National Library of Medicine,
Provides funds to train professional
$42 million
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/ep/
National Institutes of Health,
personnel; strengthen library and
extramural.html
Department of Health and
information services; facilitate access to and
Human Services
delivery of health science information; plan
and develop advanced information networks;
support certain kinds of biomedical
publications; and conduct research in
medical informatics and related sciences.
CRS-24
c11173008

.

Funding Amount
(FY2014 unless
Program Agency
Description

otherwise noted)
Web Links
National Environmental
Environmental Protection
Provides funding to states, territories, and
$10 million
http://epa.gov/exchangenetwork/grants/
Information Exchange
Agency
federally recognized Indian Tribes to support
Network Grant Program
the development of an Environmental
Information Exchange Network, including
broadband infrastructure.
Source: Compiled by CRS from FY2014 budget documents, agency websites, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and grants.gov.
a. The High Cost program is being phased out and replaced in stages by the Connect America Fund. The program provides funding to eligible service providers to
support the provision of affordable voice and broadband services, both fixed and mobile.
b. The Rural Health Care program is being replaced by the Healthcare Connect Fund.

CRS-25
c11173008

.
Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs

Author Contact Information

Lennard G. Kruger
Angele A. Gilroy
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
lkruger@crs.loc.gov, 7-7070
agilroy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7778

Congressional Research Service
26
c11173008