Jon Stewart And Ezra Klein Help GOP Paint Infrastructure Bill Broadband Grants As A Useless Boondoggle
from the thanks-but-you're-not-helping dept
We’ve long noted how the 2021 infrastructure bill included $42.5 billion for broadband dubbed the Broadband, Equity, Access And Deployment (BEAD) program.
Managed by the NTIA and individual states, we’ve also noted how this money has taken a long time to get to the states for some good reasons. Namely they wanted to avoid the massive fraud and abuse that plagued earlier FCC programs (the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund) mismanaged by the Trump administration and exploited by numerous companies (including Elon Musk’s Starlink).
Under RDOF, the FCC didn’t really take the time to fix shitty U.S. broadband maps, resulting in a lot of wasted, duplicative taxpayer money. Or ensure that ISPs that bid for funding could actually deliver the broadband they claimed. That resulted in a bunch of companies defaulting on millions of dollars in bids. It was a giant mess resulting in a ton of waste, fraud, abuse, and legal problems.
So there’s a reason why the bigger, $42.5 billion BEAD program has more annoying red tape and is managed by a completely different agency. Much of that was to avoid earlier waste, mistargeted funds, and ineffective spending. It takes a long time to accurately map broadband, make sure money isn’t going to be wasted, and confirm ISPs can actually deliver the broadband they promise. Especially if you’re going to actually value the varying input of every single individual state and make sure the subsidies are tailored to their unique needs.
So yes, there were a lot of annoying restrictions with BEAD, but it’s not like they were introduced for bureaucracy’s sake. And the money, while late, was on the cusp of rolling out this year.
Unfortunately, the GOP seized on those delays to paint the whole program as a waste (ignoring their role in why the program has more restrictions). They’re also busy using these complaints to justify redirecting billions in BEAD money away from useful local fiber ISPs, and toward Elon Musk’s congested, expensive, ozone-layer depleting satellite broadband service.
Apparently thinking he was helping matters, NY Times columnist Ezra Klein recently went on Jon Stewart’s podcast to jump into this complicated policy issue and complain about the infrastructure bill. Unfortunately, when he gets to BEAD, his complaints lacked context and only help paint the entire program as an irredeemable waste:
“This is, I want to say something because it’s very important I say this, this is the Biden administration’s process for its own bill. They wanted this to happen. This is how liberal government works now.”
At the end of the interview Stewart is shocked to “learn” that a whole BEAD subsidy program was a complete and abject failure simply because Democrats really like bureaucracy and shot themselves in the foot for their own amusement (which isn’t true):
“I’m speechless, honestly. It’s far worse than I could have imagined. But the fact that they amputated their own legs on this is what’s so stunning.”
Klein and Stewart’s inference that BEAD is entirely a useless boondoggle were then picked up by numerous right wing pseudo-news outlets who further advertised the BEAD program to millions of Americans as a supposed pointless waste.

Which is a shame, because BEAD funding was really poised to help people. At least before the GOP and Trump administration began altering the program to the benefit of a conspiratorial billionaire bigot.
That’s not to suggest BEAD was perfect. There were a lot of annoying and overly cumbersome restrictions (though I argue a lot of them on issues of climate and labor were decorative and wouldn’t have been enforced), causing some ISPs in states like Minnesota to have reservations about applying.
It’s also not to say Democrats aren’t a hot mess on strategy and messaging. And especially on broadband policy, where most of their regulatory solutions are often decorative because of the party’s refusal to take on the real cause of shitty U.S. broadband: consolidated telecom monopoly power.
But quite generally, the BEAD program is a good thing. Driving affordable broadband to unserved locations is a good thing. Making sure we map broadband access accurately before throwing billions of dollars at a program is a good thing. It took a while, but the money was starting to flow this year to a lot of states in desperate need of better, more reliable, more affordable connectivity.
The problem is there’s just a long line of things Klein can’t be bothered to mention, presumably because he didn’t research the situation deeply enough to know.
Like the fact that many BEAD restrictions are a result of Trump-era fraud and mismanagement of previous programs. Or that many of the restrictions on labor and climate were somewhat decorative and never likely to be meaningfully enforced in a country whose regulators are being absolutely destroyed.
Or the fact that other Democratic broadband policy initiatives from that same year were very successful. Like the $25 billion in broadband expansion included in the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). ARPA money is, right now, going toward tons of new fiber deployment all over the country. You probably didn’t hear about it because Democrats suck at messaging and the press doesn’t care about infrastructure.
But in many towns and cities, ARPA broadband grants are funding open access community-owned fiber networks resulting in gigabit fiber for as little as $60 a month. These are long-marginalized minority, rural, and low-income neighborhoods that have never been connected before suddenly seeing cheaper broadband than seen in many affluent cities. Had you heard about that? Had Klein?
I think Klein was maybe well intentioned but his simplistic understanding of the debate he jumped into didn’t actually help anybody. Which is often the case when hot take pundits wander outside their core areas of expertise (see: Nate Silver on global pandemics).
From what I can glean from Klein’s current “Abundance” promotional book tour and the surrounding puerile debate, one of his fairly unoriginal theses is the fairly center-right (and sometimes every accurate) complaint that there’s just too much pesky, burdensome regulation.
But in the interviews I’ve seen (whether it’s Stewart or Lex Fridman) he mostly floats over the fact that authoritarians and a broken Supreme Court are completely destroying the regulatory state with what will likely be broad and potentially fatal repercussions.
Myopically fixating on the Democrats’ love of bureaucracy while Trumpism burns functional federal governance to the ground is… odd? You’re bickering about whether California high speed rail sees too much red tape while Trump completely dismantles all labor rights, consumer protections, public safety standards, corporate oversight, and the social safety net?
It’s like bickering over the drapes while an arsonist sets the house on fire.
Genuinely: the red tape affixed to BEAD really is the very least of our problems right now. Authoritarians are absolutely demolishing what’s left of U.S. consumer protection and oversight of shitty predatory monopolies like AT&T and Comcast. Is there some specific reason Klein doesn’t want to give this the same level of hyperventilation while on his book tour trying to maximize book sales?
Again, I think Democrats suck at messaging and strategy and think the party needs to be completely rebuilt with smarter, younger, hungrier, more creative members. I agree that U.S. telecom subsidization is historically a hot mess. I agree U.S. regulation often falls short, adds harmful counterproductive and unnecessary layers, can often be performative, or aids incumbents. I’ve probably spilled more ink about the shittiness of sloppy telecom subsidization and telecom regulatory capture than literally anybody alive.
I guess all I’m asking is for pundits to actually understand the subject they’re talking about before opening their mouths. Klein doesn’t really help U.S. broadband with his comments; his selective, simplistic podcast hot take only really propped up the GOP narrative that this program was irredeemable when, while imperfect and annoyingly bureaucratic, it actually is a good-faith effort at improvement.
Filed Under: abundance, bead, broadband, ezra klein, fiber, high speed internet, infrastructure, jon stewart, telecom
BestNetTech is off for the holidays! We'll be back soon, and until then don't forget to




Comments on “Jon Stewart And Ezra Klein Help GOP Paint Infrastructure Bill Broadband Grants As A Useless Boondoggle”
Uh
“It’s OK to pass poorly written bills because the meaningless and performative restrictions we put in place won’t be enforced by incompetant inspectors anyway”
Are you trying to make a joke?
Re:
Might have been you.
I agree with that last part, but I still feel like maybe funding ISPs is the wrong way to do this. We’re still not really addressing monopoly power at all, and this could further entrench it.
Perhaps what we should be doing is funding last-mile residential broadband infrastructure providers that do not provide internet service. Historically, ISPs have just tended to appear when they’ve had access to such infrastruture on fair terms. Everyone and their dog seemed to be running an ISP back in the 1990s, over the regulated telephone network; in countries that provide similar access to DSL, fiber, and cable networks, there’s still usually quite a bit of selection.
The upshot of this would be that, if the huge incumbents wanted to get the money, they’d have to allow third-party providers to use their networks, and maybe they’d even have to sell either their last-mile-infrastructure or consumer-internet-access business. We could stop arguing about prices, transfer caps, speed upgrades, and so on, because the market would sort that stuff out.
And if our goal is avoiding waste, that would avoid the biggest waste of all: multiple overlapping fiber plants outside each home, and the need to re-dig the yard to bring it in from the street whenever someone switches providers. We should just have a few fibers brought in at the same time, brought to a reasonably large interconnection point in which ISPs can rent space to have a fiber connected to their equipment.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
All Planning No Action
It’s not messaging that’s a problem. It’s the bureaucracy. As Ezra Klein mentioned, 56 jurisdictions have started the bureaucratic process of getting a plan approved. Only 3 have made it through all 14 steps, to approach final approval.
Similar to how California couldn’t build their high speed rail line across the state, despite wasting billions of dollars, this BEAD program will likely never produce any significant results.
Re:
🥱
Re:
And will not as long as Reps are working on it.
Re:
And if it were the other way around, you’d be bitching about how there are no regulations on the money and it’s just getting disappeared into rich people’s pockets.
You have no values. You have no morals. The only thing you care about is making your team look better than the other team, you disgusting sack of shit.
Re: Re:
Inb4 false equivalence.
Re: Re:
This is why I value the private sector over government. If they don’t build the thing, then they don’t get paid. But also, if they squander their money then they lose their own money, and not that of others. Private enterprise needs to get both spending and accountability correct. Government can rarely accomplish both with a big project.
Re: Re: Re:
Your position flies in the face of centuries of evidence, you arrogant, ignorant fuckwit.
Re: Re: Re:
But the private sector is profit driven, so anything not in service of the greatest possible profit will fall by the way side. If poor and rural people were more profitable to provide high speed internet service to, they’d already have internet service. The government isn’t required to only think of profit. It’s not perfect, especially when it’s often run by profiteering power-mongers, but it has the potential to be far more humanitarian. I know the idea of thinking about the well-being of all human beings rather than making money is anathematic to you, but other people actually value human life.
You yourself are likely a victim of your own preference. The private sector will let you die when you’re not profitable to support. But you seem to be okay with that as long as there’s other people in line in front of you for the orphan crushing machine.
Don't fall for the Fox spin
As the commenter above notes, Ezra Klein and Jon Stewart are pointing to a problem that the Dems have. It should not have taken so long.
Here’s the bill (2021) https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684/text
Here’s the NOFO (May 2022) https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684/text
Here’s the Five Year Action Plan Guidance (Sept 2022 — 270 days to submit) https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/BEAD_Five-Year_Action_Plan_Guidance_1.pdf
Here’s the Initial Proposal Guidance (July 2023) https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/BEAD_Initial_Proposal_Guidance_Volumes_I_II.pdf
Here;s the final Final Proposal Guidance (Jan 2025) https://www.ntia.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/bead_final_proposal_guidance_v1.2.pdf
Get stuff done faster! Dems should be outraged that this program took so long that Musk now owns it.
Re:
Dems (and anyone) should be outraged it took so long, but unless you task a military detachment to watch over an FCC with no leadership and hamstrung by an at least half-corporatist, anti-Dem board in order to force them to complete broadband mapping at gunpoint, what the fuck do you expect? It takes time, but yes, there should have been more prodding to get it done before the country was taken out back and shot.
'If it has regulations that means it's bad'
I guess all I’m asking is for pundits to actually understand the subject they’re talking about before opening their mouths. Klein doesn’t really help U.S. broadband with his comments; his selective, simplistic podcast hot take only really propped up the GOP narrative that this program was irredeemable when, while imperfect and annoyingly bureaucratic, it actually is a good-faith effort at improvement.
Why it’s almost as though that was the point.
From what I can glean from Klein’s current “Abundance” promotional book tour and the surrounding puerile debate, one of his fairly unoriginal theses is the fairly center-right (and sometimes every accurate) complaint that there’s just too much pesky, burdensome regulation.
But in the interviews I’ve seen (whether it’s Stewart or Lex Fridman) he mostly floats over the fact that authoritarians and a broken Supreme Court are completely destroying the regulatory state with what will likely be broad and potentially fatal repercussions.
Myopically fixating on the Democrats’ love of bureaucracy while Trumpism burns functional federal governance to the ground is… odd? You’re bickering about whether California high speed rail sees too much red tape while Trump completely dismantles all labor rights, consumer protections, public safety standards, corporate oversight, and the social safety net?
He’s either too stupid to tie his own shoes or he knew damn well what he was doing when he condemned the program because of all that heinous ‘Hey let’s at least try to ensure the money gets spent correctly this time?’ regulations.
Nobody to turn to
I guess working for NYT means you have to compromise your integrity. Ezra Klein seems to be yet another “progressive” that will sell-out for a buck. And really disappointing that Jon Stewart falls for the schpiel.
“Namely they wanted to avoid the massive fraud and abuse that plagued earlier FCC programs…”
Not anymore!
Make Fraud Great Again
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Have it out on Klein’s Podcast
I appreciate your knowledgeable, experienced based perspective on Klein’s new book. I think it would be useful for you to go on Klein’s podcast to have a robust discussion on this topic. And it might even break through to dispel some of the misconceptions about this issue that unfortunately are in the ether. Would be interesting.
Re:
Fuck off, AI bot.
Posting this from BEAD funded fiber
BEAD funded the fiber that was laid in our rural/suburban area 2 years ago. It’s an open network with multiple ISPs providing service.
In 2022 I was paying $130/mo for 1g/40mb with 40ms latency to the IX.
In 2023 I was paying $90/mo for 2g/2g with 3ms latency to the IX.
I use that upload every day.
We had some outages over the 1st year but by year 2 it was fine. Service was lost with power when Hermine came thru – so it requires power like cable (and unlike FiOS).
Re:
Fiber always requires power. I assume FiOS has backup power because the cables are directly connected to telco central offices—fibers can easily reach 50 miles, unlike DSL connections which usually need intermediate “remote” equipment scattered around cities, and central offices have generally been engineered for extreme reliability (possibly because regulators required it; remember regulators?). Cable operators could provide backup power too, but, in my experience, they just don’t give a shit, and their customers have gotten used to cable sucking.
Power-over-fiber is a real thing now, that could, in theory, provide enough power even to operate customer equipment during outages—if any company cared enough to implement it. Governments could mandate that, but, of course, this one won’t, and I’m not sure it’d be reasonable anyway. It would be reasonable to require network operators to power their own equipment, so that customers with backup power would be able to use the network. Including important customers like fire stations.
Investor presentation from a BEAD funded infra
Link to OpenInfra investor presentation from last fall.
https://openinfra.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Investor-Presentation-January-2024.pdf
Klein and Stewart have big egos
They both got where they are because they are bright and thoughtful. But they also got there because they have hubris and believe they know better than everyone else and we believed them. Now, fighting to keep the media crown, they are willing to grab any outrage that comes their way, whether true and important or not.
I’m going to save my judgment until I read the book. Klein and Stewart are acting in good faith. They are generally more well read and researched than most and shouldn’t be dismissed just for getting a few details wrong. I don’t think discussions like this serve the GOP. Not implementing change fast enough does though.
I find it facilitating that a little self criticism has struck such a nerve. Evaluating our legislation by the outcomes it produces is the larger theme here. Other countries are building infrastructure much faster at lower costs. We should be able to fund something and start building it in the same presidential term. Is that really so controversial?
Wish you would use less politically divisive language. You make good points, but if I forward this to a Republican, they’re likely to see your name calling and discount your facts.