U.S. to Invest $42 Billion in Universal Internet Access

Data center network connections
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

The White House on Monday announced plans to spend as much as $42 billion on making internet access universal in the country by 2030, according to a report by Reuters. This initiative is part of President Joe Biden's new economic policies, which will be a part of his 2024 re-election campaign.

"Today, 24 million people in our country do not have access to high-speed internet, either because they cannot afford the monthly cost of a plan or because they live in communities that have not yet been fully connected to fiber-optic networks," Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement. "Every person in our nation, no matter where they live, should be able to access and afford high-speed internet."

The funding was made possible by the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program, which was authorized by the 2021 $1 trillion infrastructure law that President Biden supported. The allocation of funds was determined based on a recently released coverage map by the Federal Communications Commission, which identified areas with limited access to broadband.

Broadband companies such as Verizon, Comcast, Charter Communications, and AT&T have been hesitant to provide access to low-population rural communities due to the high costs involved and the limited number of potential subscribers in these regions.

The states receiving the highest funding amounts are Texas and California, the two most populous states in the country, with $3.1 billion and $1.9 billion respectively. Less populous states like Virginia, Alabama, and Louisiana also ranked in the top 10 for funding, as they have large rural areas that lack internet connectivity compared to their major urban centers. The funding amounts vary, ranging from $27 million for U.S. territories like the U.S. Virgin Islands to over $3.1 billion for Texas. Each state will receive a minimum of $107 million.

During a White House address on Monday, President Biden highlighted the significance of this investment, stating that it is the largest investment ever made in high-speed internet. He emphasized that, in today's economy, internet access is as crucial as electricity and water. 

Anton Shilov
Freelance News Writer

Anton Shilov is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • 2Be_or_Not2Be
    I sure hope one of the provisions in the law is to ensure that the companies taking the money ACTUALLY install the new fiber/lines/infrastructure. I seem to recall that a bunch of the current players (Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, et al) took money from the existing broadband communications fund, but a lot never actually created the infrastructure with the money they took.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    The other side of this problem is that even if telecoms want to expand their infrastructure, there's the problem of getting those affected by the construction to agree to it.

    I did listen to an NPR podcast about something related to this where low income families could have their internet access costs subsidized instead. I think that would have more of an impact of getting broadband access to more people.
    Reply
  • Giroro
    Oh boy, more dark fiber.
    2Be_or_Not2Be said:
    I sure hope one of the provisions in the law is to ensure that the companies taking the money ACTUALLY install the new fiber/lines/infrastructure. I seem to recall that a bunch of the current players (Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, et al) took money from the existing broadband communications fund, but a lot never actually created the infrastructure with the money they took.

    As far as I know they installed the fiber, they just never connected any customers or equipment to it... Then I think they eventually sold the dark fiber they got paid to build for extra profit, over a decade later.

    And now a couple thousand people get to exclusively benefit from those billions in tax dollars by having the opportunity to buy a Google Fiber subscription, in like 3 major cities.
    Reply
  • Geef
    2Be_or_Not2Be said:
    I sure hope one of the provisions in the law is to ensure that the companies taking the money ACTUALLY install the new fiber/lines/infrastructure.

    I totally agree.

    People also don't need a super fast connection to use the internet for most things. Even a 10Mbit connection to everyone would make them able to watch 1080p on their TV or phone. If they setup wireless and just cap it 10Mbit it would work out fine.

    This would work well for companies that make you pay for connection too. People want to watch 4k TV? Then you gotta pay for that speed!
    Reply
  • lmcnabney
    I assume this won't change pricing in the US at all. So billions of my tax dollars and I am still paying $70/mo for 300/300.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    lmcnabney said:
    So billions of my tax dollars and I am still paying $70/mo for 300/300.
    You contribute billions to the US government? Then $70 should be worth a nanosecond of your time.
    Reply
  • Zerk2012
    Another scam to the American people to make rich companies more money for doing almost nothing.
    Reply
  • thisisaname
    2Be_or_Not2Be said:
    I sure hope one of the provisions in the law is to ensure that the companies taking the money ACTUALLY install the new fiber/lines/infrastructure. I seem to recall that a bunch of the current players (Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, et al) took money from the existing broadband communications fund, but a lot never actually created the infrastructure with the money they took.
    They should also have to pay is back with interest and a large penalty if fail to do it!
    Reply
  • ohio_buckeye
    I know my parents haven’t had good access to internet. Dad told me recently that years ago when a similar program happened that the phone company came through and laid fiber and never hooked it up to the homes. I guess dad asked the guy about it and they were pretty much putting it in because they were getting money to do so.
    Reply
  • jeremyj_83
    lmcnabney said:
    I am still paying $70/mo for 300/300.
    I'd take that over my 200/20 connection for $80/month any day.
    Reply