BEAD funding to satellite providers raises concerns about long-term commitment to rural areas and higher service rates. State perspectives question the value of satellite funding since residents already have access. Although free equipment is required, pricing for services is not regulated, leading to fears of increased costs. Some states view spending on satellite as not yielding tangible benefits for residents and are considering returned funds to the federal treasury rather than allocating them to satellite programs.
"From a state perspective, it is not clear what the states providing funds to satellite will actually gain, as their residents already have access to satellite broadband."
"The combination of no rate regulation and being the monopoly providers means that as a practical matter, 'free' will result in higher prices."
"Grants going to satellite do not result in place-based networks, raising concern about the long-term commitment to the rural locations."
"Some states are considering returning all the money to the federal treasury on the grounds that, in their view, spending money on satellites does not buy anything real for their residents."
Collection
[
|
...
]