Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
This bill directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), working with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), to collect and integrate data submitted by Federal agencies for the Broadband Funding Map to improve deployment planning and avoid redundant federally funded broadband buildouts. The FCC must open and complete a notice of inquiry within defined timelines to evaluate the map’s functionality, transparency, data quality, timeliness of agency updates, potential changes to reported categories, and alignment with FCC mapping tools.
Extent of support tied to safeguards: liberals emphasize equity safeguards and resources to ensure accurate mapping; conservatives emphasize limits on FCC authority and unfunded mandates.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative coordination requirements.
This bill directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), working with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), to collect and integrate data submitted by Federal agencies for the Broadband Funding Map to improve deployment planning and avoid redundant federally funded broadband buildouts.
The FCC must open and complete a notice of inquiry within defined timelines to evaluate the map’s functionality, transparency, data quality, timeliness of agency updates, potential changes to reported categories, and alignment with FCC mapping tools.
The Government Accountability Office (Comptroller General) must, within 180 days of enactment, study and report to Congress on agencies’ roles and performance in maintaining the Broadband Funding Map, interagency coordination, whether the FCC has sufficient authority to collect needed data, NTIA’s parallel efforts, and how improved map use could save taxpayer dollars.
On content alone the bill is a low-risk, technocratic measure that requires coordination and reporting rather than creating costly or politically charged obligations; those characteristics align with historically higher adoption rates. Passage still depends on committee prioritization, scheduling, and potential interagency or stakeholder objections about scope or data definitions, so the bill is likely but not certain to become law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative coordination requirements. It clearly defines purpose, actors, topics for review, and timelines, and integrates with existing statutory authorities. It does not authorize substantive program changes within the text but seeks information and analysis to inform such changes.
Extent of support tied to safeguards: liberals emphasize equity safeguards and resources to ensure accurate mapping; conservatives emphasize limits on FCC authority and unfunded mandates.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
The clearest budget scorecard attached to this bill: what it changes for direct spending, revenue, and the deficit.
As ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on February 12, 2026
Extent of support tied to safeguards: liberals emphasize equity safeguards and resources to ensure accurate mapping; conservatives emphasize limits on FCC authority and unfunded mandates.
A mainstream progressive would likely view the bill mostly positively as an accountability and transparency measure that could reduce wasteful federal spending and target broadband dollars to underserved communities.
They would welcome data-driven planning and interagency coordination if it improves service in rural, low-income, and tribal areas.
However, they would watch for mapping methodology and completeness issues that could mask remaining gaps or enable programs to exclude marginalized communities.
A pragmatic moderate would generally view this bill as a sensible oversight and efficiency measure that promotes better planning and potential taxpayer savings without immediately expanding regulatory regimes.
They would appreciate the GAO review and the FCC inquiry as tools to surface practical problems and improvements.
Their support would be conditional on clear timelines, minimal additional unfunded burdens for agencies, and assurances that the effort leads to actionable improvements rather than purely bureaucratic reports.
A mainstream conservative would be open to measures that prevent wasteful federal spending and improve interagency coordination, but would be wary of expanding FCC authority, creating additional regulatory burdens, or centralizing control of program planning.
Concerns would center on federal overreach, unfunded mandates for states and private providers, and potential misuse of compiled data to justify new federal interventions.
They would favor limiting authority, protecting proprietary information, and ensuring the effort promotes efficient spending rather than new program expansion.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
On content alone the bill is a low-risk, technocratic measure that requires coordination and reporting rather than creating costly or politically charged obligations; those characteristics align with historically higher adoption rates. Passage still depends on committee prioritization, scheduling, and potential interagency or stakeholder objections about scope or data definitions, so the bill is likely but not certain to become law.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Extent of support tied to safeguards: liberals emphasize equity safeguards and resources to ensure accurate mapping; conservatives emphasiz…
On content alone the bill is a low-risk, technocratic measure that requires coordination and reporting rather than creating costly or polit…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative coordination requirements. It clearly defines purpose, actors, topics for review, and timelines, and integr…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.