Republicans Keep Taking Credit For Billions In Broadband Subsidies Only Made Possible By The COVID Relief And Infrastructure Bills They Vehemently Opposed
from the yes-it-is-I,-the-greatest-political-leader-ever dept
There’s an historic $50 billion in broadband subsidies currently heading to the states courtesy of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). There are plenty of potential hiccups on stuff like mapping that could screw things up, but, any way you slice it, this money should still have an amazing, positive impact on affordable broadband expansion.
Amusingly though, the same Republicans who vehemently opposed and voted against both bills are now happily taking credit for their benefits among their constituents.
Case in point: Republican Governor Ron DeSantis keeps crowing about Florida’s broadband investments made possible via Florida’s “Broadband Opportunity Program.” A significant chunk of those funds ($400 million, page 5) were only made possible via the federal ARPA bill DeSantis and state senators opposed, but good luck finding any mention of that in state press releases on the subject. The whole thing was, apparently, Ronald’s idea:
“Investing in reliable internet infrastructure strengthens local economies and opens up new opportunities for students, businesses and families,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “I am happy to award this $22 million to support Florida’s small and rural communities and I look forward to making more awards in the future that expand internet access to all Floridians.”
I’m seeing the same thing play out in most Republican controlled states, where leaders have (as required by the bills) created what are often their first ever broadband offices to disperse the funds, then pretended that this was all their idea, and that the lion’s share of the money isn’t coming from federal programs they fought tooth and nail against for the better part of the last few years.
Like in Montana, where Republican Governor Greg Gianforte has also repeatedly issued press releases lauding broadband subsidies doled out by the state, without mentioning that Montana’s ConnectMT program is primarily going to be built on the back of ARPA and IIJA funds:
“Expanding access to reliable broadband is a central element of Governor Gianforte’s Montana Comeback Plan.”
Our press often can’t point this out, so Republicans get to have their cake (attack helpful legislation under the highly performative pretense that federal government is always inherently bad) and eat it too (take direct credit for federal legislation they opposed that provides genuine, meaningful assistance).
Granted when it comes to broadband policy, the Republican (and often Democrat) solution has been to basically pretend that broadband monopolies don’t exist and aren’t the obvious cause of the country’s patchy, slow, expensive broadband. While at the same time demonizing pretty much every creative, local voter approved effort to do anything about it (House Republicans literally attempted to ban helpful community broadband networks during a plague).
Granted there are plenty of Democrats who mindlessly pander to telecom monopolies as well. Senators Manchin, Masto, and Kelly (with the GOP’s help) directly derailed the nomination of popular reformer Gigi Sohn to the FCC (leaving the agency without the voting majority to do absolutely anything deemed controversial by industry), and Democratic FCC boss Jessica Rosenworcel has an obvious and comical allergy to even acknowledging telecom monopolization exists or that it profoundly harms consumers.
Mindlessly throwing money at the “digital divide,” but doing absolutely nothing to address the corruption or monopoly rot causing the problem, is very much a bipartisan affair. That said, Democrats did oversee what will ultimately be the biggest broadband funding effort in American history at a time where broadband is increasingly viewed as a utility, which isn’t exactly small potatoes.
In contrast, Republicans have supported AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon on on every last policy debate of note over the better part of a generation (net neutrality, privacy, community broadband bans, etc.), routinely fight efforts to do absolutely anything about telecom monopolization, then taking credit for subsidy programs they claimed to have oppose. There’s a messaging opportunity here for Democrats they’re consistently afraid to exploit.
And when Republican-controlled states do take advantage of said funds, they often do their very best to ensure the lion’s share of the money goes to giant monopolies (see how most of Montana’s new federal broadband funding is being shoveled to Charter and Comcast, two regional monopolies directly responsible for the market failure we’re pretending to address).
If you were to read telecom trade mags or mainstream press coverage on telecom and broadband policy, absolutely none of this context is mentioned. None. Press coverage of the sector is usually superficial cribbing from press releases, which is why it’s so easy for Republican leadership to take credit for policies they opposed, with the voting populace never being the wiser.
Filed Under: arpa, bead, broadband, desantis, digital divide, fcc, high speed internet, iija, infrastructure bill, jessica rosenworcel, joe manchin, kelly, masto, ron desantis, subsidies, telecom


Comments on “Republicans Keep Taking Credit For Billions In Broadband Subsidies Only Made Possible By The COVID Relief And Infrastructure Bills They Vehemently Opposed”
The GOP: You get the blame, we'll claim the fame
It’s like slashing the budget of the local fire department to ‘save money by trimming socialist programs’ and then when someone’s house is prevented from being burned to the ground by the same department boasting about how it’s only thanks to your stellar leadership and support of the department that the house was saved.
I’d call it a shameful and grossly dishonest tactic but to those using it shame is a foreign concept and dishonesty is only a problem when other people engage in it.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Package Deal
Oftentimes, federal bills encompass a wide variety of topics, providing funding in one area, while directing new regulations for an entirely different subject. Separating these different subjects is impossible during the course of the modern legislative process. Lawmakers usually never get an individual vote on every provision of a bill, and must vote on the bill as an overall package. One can easily oppose the overall bill, while still favoring some individual components.
Re:
” Separating these different subjects is impossible ”
This is a ridiculously stupid thing to say.
Re:
Oh please. Of course it’s possible. You just put each thing into its own bill. It doesn’t happen because legislators are too busy throwing blame around and inciting division for fundraising dollars that they don’t get around to much actual legislating so they put everything in one bill so it’s less time for them to deal with, and because it’s politically advantageous to pack things together because if you slap a provision on your bill that increases penalties against child abusers, you can then mudsling at anyone voting against it that “OMG THEY VOTED AGAINST PROTECTING YOUR CHILDREN!!!!!!!” even if the rest of your bill was all about selling Alaska back to Russia for $1 and an exclusive oil drilling contract for your company.
Re: Re:
Or throwing unpassable shit into must-pass bills to get them passed because VOTES.
Re:
keep coping straight trash
If they were principled they would refuse the offered money, but that would upset an industry that funds their campaigns. By claiming the credit they gain public support, while maintaining the money flow into their war chests, a win win for the politicians.
“Truth” is negotiable in this post-Citizens United world, and our role models have been replaced by “influencers”, hence little accountability for anyone. Justice is now officially revenge, and due process only applies to those who can afford the right legal team.
Re:
Truth was always negotiable in politics. Citizens United wasnt the catalyst for that.
That you think influencers replaced role models tell me you think role models were just walking bilboards and you had no idea what a role model was.
Due process has always been tied to wealth. the access to justice issue isn’t new. Thats a pillar of how the post civil war south kept the freed blacks in check, and it echos similar problems centuries earlier.
Outside your justice is revenge bit, which i can’t parse, These are deep systemic problems presenting in new ways, but they aren’t new problems.
Re:
I just heard the screeching of the entirety of the academic field of history. They would like to inform you how ridiculously wrong you are.
Would you like examples from every single era of history on how wrong you are?
If you think about it...
Taking credit for something the opposed in the vote is just another Republican lie. “Sure, we did that.” after they vehemently opposed it is just lying about their position. And lies are what Republicans do, so this is just Republicans staying in character. You could almost say lying is a core Republican principle… but that would be a lie, too, because really Republicans don’t have -any- principles.
Re: Just because they're all bad doesn't mean they don't have them
You could almost say lying is a core Republican principle… but that would be a lie, too, because really Republicans don’t have -any- principles.
Nonsense, republicans have plenty of principles. Between ‘Screw you I got mine’ and ‘It’s never our fault’, ‘Hypocrisy is only a problem when other people engage in it’ and ‘Rules are for other people’ they’ve got plenty of principles they live by.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Another Bode Broadside
Neither of the scant two (in the entire USA there weren’t any more?!?) governors said anything like “I’m taking the credit” or “This was my idea” as Bode bald-facedly states.
Sure, one could plausibly say they’re hypocritical, but those two had absolutely nothing, not a single little bit, to do with the passage of that horrible bill. The dotard in charge handed out the funds, and the governors took it.
Hate them with a hot fire of a religious zealot if you will, but don’t show ignorance by obtusely inventing bullshit to do it.
Re:
DeNassti said, ““I am happy to award this $22 million…”
He didn’t say, “On behalf of President Biden and the Democrats I am happy to award this $22 Million…”
Re:
Note:
No, there’s zero evidence of intelligent life behind any of LittleCupcakes’s other comments, either.
so how’s about ‘NAMING AND SHAMING’ them throught the country??
Re:
Against people who are immune to that sort of action amd would shoot you for trying that?