President Joe Biden recently traveled to North Carolina to promote his goal of affordable internet access for all Americans, but the promise for 23 million families across the U.S. is on shaky ground.

That’s because a subsidy that helps people with limited resources afford internet access is set to expire this spring.

The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provides $30 a month for qualifying families in most places and $75 on tribal lands, will run out of money by the end of April if Congress doesn’t extend it further.

“I think this should be high priority for Congress,” North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, a Democrat who has worked with a bipartisan group of governors to promote the program, said in a phone interview. “To many families, $30 a month is a big deal.”

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Alternately, they could introduce more pricing regulations and antitrust crackdowns on internet providers, introduce legislation to explicitly allow municipal internet access, etc.

    We have the 6th most expensive internet in the world; if we had cheaper internet (on par with what other first world countries offer), we wouldn’t need these subsidies because it’d be cheap enough anyway.

  • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    We shouldn’t be subsidizing giant corporations in the first place. How about just making proper, consumer protecting regulations instead?

    • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Looking at the policy on the website here it looks like it’s actually fairly reasonable. If you make less than x, are using a listed governmental assistance program, or qualify for the low-income isp plan then the cost is $30/month for 100Mbps Internet. The benefit that’s listed in the article is the current subsidy that would remove the rest of the cost.

      • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        Well, that’s not really the problem. The problem is that the government is covering the difference (through subsidizing the mega-corps that offer this).

    • Melkath@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Because that would be actually doing something that isn’t killing brown people across the ocean.

  • Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    9 months ago

    Internet has always struck me as something that should be nationalized and supplied by the state (for free)

    Everyone needs it and the whole nation just gets squeezed by these companies.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 months ago

      And requires a lot of infrastructure on public roads and poles. Why this is still private after it was clear ISPs operated like gangs with turf is beyond me. It was clear that it should be nationalized 2 decades ago.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        The Constitution explicitly calls for the creation of the post office and postal roads. The same rationale that enabling fast reliable communication is a duty of government could easily be extended to the internet. It Biden pushed for this, emphasizing how it would enable people living in small rural towns to work remotely, he would steal a large amount of traditionally Republican voters.

        • Wrench@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          9 months ago

          Even in high density cities. Google fiber failed to bring fast and cheap internet to most of the country because the ISP mafias made it impossible.

          Ohh, you need access to this public pole? Well, by law (that we lobbied for), you have to have a representative from each ISP connected to that pole to be present. Looks like we’re booked for a year. Oh, sorry, something came up and we weren’t able to make the meeting you set up a year ago. Guess you’ll have to try again, but oh look, we’re booked for another years. Sowee

  • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    My power company put in fiber. Now my internet is a coop utility. 0 reason this shouldn’t be nation wide, especially for coops

  • Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    The subsidies ISPs who spent their time hiking up rates on their customers and blocking access to actual high-speed fiber lines that are already there? What good were those subsidies doing for the people anyhow?

    • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Maybe I’m missing the part where the federal program will choose one state to continue funding and exclude the others. Can you help me find it please?

      Otherwise this would look like it’s either a failure to comprehend on your part or an attempt to misinterpret what’s being reported in a way to stir up discontent among people who just skip from the headline and blurb to the comments here.

        • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Biden is doing victory laps because he’s trying to bring it back in one state that is coincidentally one he has to win but polls horribly.

          This part. Show me where he’s bringing it back for one state and not others.

            • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              I’ve seen you make incorrect claims about what he’s doing based on your misunderstanding of what is in the article that started this thread. Your clarification is that you also misinterpreted a different article. I can accept that acknowledgement and hopefully now you are better informed.

              That’s the charitable interpretation anyway, not enough information yet to say that you’re engaging in bad faith.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I love how Biden gets the blame for the Republican Congress doing next to nothing legislatively, figuratively sitting cross armed on the floor for at least FOUR MONTHS now. Also the Republicans being at the direction of Agent Orange not to pass anything that could make Biden look good. Hooray.

      I’m not impressed with everything that Biden has managed to do during then, but it kind of amazes me that he could accomplish anything at all against this level of wilful obstruction against the US legislative process.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        but it kind of amazes me that he could accomplish anything at all against this level of wilful obstruction against the US legislative process.

        You’re talking about the guy who spent all last primary saying he could negotiate with Republicans…

        He pretty much gives them everything they want the few times he tries to make a deal, like wanting to give a president the power to close borders whenever they feel like. You know eventually a Republican will be president right? Yet Dems get nothing out of that deal, Biden is just giving away something trump dreamed he could do, for precisely zero reasons.

        • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          He may have a record of being able to negotiate with Republicans in the past, but now he’s dealing with a bunch of stubborn babies, which I don’t know if Biden is cut out for it.

    • Melkath@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Kinda like when he sanctioned 4 people in Israel and went “there, fine, I sanctioned Israel. Happy?”

      Or when he started to actually run the program he failed to run for 3 years and said “there, fine, I am forgiving student loan debt. Happy?”

      Or when he passed legislation to make it illegal for railway workers to strike in perpetuity and got them a 1 time pay raise and said “there, fine, I fixed the dangerous and unfair practices of the railway companies. Happy?”