Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This bill directs the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to produce a National Strategy to Close the Digital Divide and an Implementation Plan, coordinating covered federal agencies to improve deployment, access, affordability, and adoption of broadband. It requires inventories of federal, state, and local broadband programs, interagency roles and performance measures, streamlined permitting for access to federal property, attention to Tribal lands, public consultation, regular briefings to Congress, and a GAO study on effectiveness.
Support vs. concern over federal coordination and bureaucracy
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑specified study/strategy and reporting instrument with detailed content requirements, timelines, and oversight provisions.
This bill directs the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to produce a National Strategy to Close the Digital Divide and an Implementation Plan, coordinating covered federal agencies to improve deployment, access, affordability, and adoption of broadband.
It requires inventories of federal, state, and local broadband programs, interagency roles and performance measures, streamlined permitting for access to federal property, attention to Tribal lands, public consultation, regular briefings to Congress, and a GAO study on effectiveness.
The bill emphasizes common data sets and use of federal broadband maps, monitoring for waste, fraud, and abuse, and does not grant authority over the FCC.
Content is low-controversy and technical, improving chances; yet it requires congressional action without funding, so enactment depends on legislative calendar and priorities.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑specified study/strategy and reporting instrument with detailed content requirements, timelines, and oversight provisions. It meaningfully addresses interagency coordination, required consultations, program inventories, permitting issues, Tribal concerns, and GAO evaluation.
Support vs. concern over federal coordination and bureaucracy
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Support vs. concern over federal coordination and bureaucracy
Liberal-leaning observers would likely view the bill positively as a concrete federal effort to coordinate programs and reduce barriers to broadband for underserved communities, including Tribal lands.
They would appreciate the focus on common data, public consultation, and measures to address affordability and adoption.
A centrist would view the bill as a pragmatic, administrative step to improve program management and reduce duplication, while wanting clearer cost estimates and measurable outcomes.
They would value the GAO review and timelines, but seek assurances the plan is efficient and fiscally responsible.
A mainstream conservative would be cautious, viewing the bill as expanded federal coordination that could increase bureaucracy and impose administrative burdens without new funds.
They would stress protection of FCC authority and worry about federal overreach and potential costs to taxpayers and state autonomy.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is low-controversy and technical, improving chances; yet it requires congressional action without funding, so enactment depends on legislative calendar and priorities.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Support vs. concern over federal coordination and bureaucracy
Content is low-controversy and technical, improving chances; yet it requires congressional action without funding, so enactment depends on…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑specified study/strategy and reporting instrument with detailed content requirements, timelines, and oversight provisions. It meaningfully addresses interag…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.