The authoritative news source for communications regulation
Assessments on Consumers 'Most Important'

Gomez Concerned About USF's Future and Digital Equity as ACP Ends

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez told us during an exclusive Communications Daily Q&A that evaluating assessments made on consumers' bills as part of funding the Universal Service Fund is her top issue amid calls for contribution reform (see 2404190043). Sworn in in September, Gomez also mentioned concerns about USF's future and the affordable connectivity program. She also urged ISPs to create their digital equity plans with "intentionality."

TO READ THE FULL STORY
Start A Trial

Gomez came to the FCC from the private sector after serving as NTIA deputy administrator from 2009 to 2013 and various FCC positions prior to that. The following interview was edited for length and clarity.

You've been in this role for almost a year. How have you been adjusting?

I'm having such a great time. It's really a terrific job. It's a little bit like coming home. I'm familiar with the agency. I'm familiar with how it works. So, it was actually a pretty easy transition. So everything, I think, is running smoothly, and I'm really enjoying myself.

When there were four commissioners, almost every vote was unanimous. Now that there is a full commission, there are more hot-button issues. Do you feel like the 10th floor is still cordial and cooperative? How is your relationship with your fellow commissioners?

I would start with the fact that all the commissioners have made it a point to get to know each other well [and] to get along personally, even if you don't agree on how to get to policy outcomes. Second, I think all commissioners really have the same end goal. They just have different philosophies on how to get to those end goals. And so, we respect each other a great deal, and really like each other. We see each other outside of work, not frequently, but every now and then.

You mentioned the commissioners have the same goal in mind. How is the collaboration among commissioners?

The collaboration is really good. Sometimes we just reach an impasse and that's when you see the votes go a different way. But we work together to try to reach a good goal.

Future of USF

What should be done about USF reform and its sustainability?

The USF is so important to make sure that everyone everywhere has the connectivity that they need to participate in modern society. So we really need to make sure that it's set up for success and that everyone benefits from the next century's economy. I'm grateful for the bipartisan, bicameral universal service working group in Congress. They are very actively looking at this issue, especially the issue of sustainability of the USF. And I think that they've come up with some very interesting proposals. And I'm hoping that they will move forward quickly.

The one issue that I want to make sure of is in whatever way that we perform the assessments. I would want to evaluate how assessments on consumers' bills would affect the very affordability of the services being assessed. So, for me, that is probably the most important issue.

As you know, Commissioner Brendan Carr has mentioned assessing big tech companies. When the FCC reclassified broadband as a Communications Act Title II telecom service, some were upset that ISPs were granted forbearance from USF contributions. Are you still looking at what the options are or have you been leaning a certain way?

I am looking at what the options are. What is clear to me is we need to broaden the contribution base, but this is where we need Congress to act because we need Congress to give us authority to broaden that contribution base, regardless of what it is that we ended up with. But I don't have a particular thing I'm advocating for.

With the affordable connectivity program at its end, some enrolled households may be eligible for the Lifeline benefit that weren't previously enrolled. Are you confident that those households will be able to transition to get that benefit? Can USF and Lifeline handle that potential influx of subscribers?

The Lifeline program is an alternative, but it's not a perfect alternative. And you raise a very good point. I don't think the current Lifeline program can absorb the entirety of the ACP program. The programs are also not the same. One of the ways that they're significantly different is that the Lifeline program requires the providers to be eligible telecom carriers (ETC). The ACP program does not require that, so some of the providers that are participating in the program and providing those discounts via ACP won't be able to participate in the Lifeline program unless they go through the process of being certified as an ETC.

So, it's an imperfect alternative. And, again, we just really need Congress to act, either through this USF reform or by just refunding the program on a temporary basis until they're able to adopt whatever the final USF reform's going to be.

Prioritizing Digital Equity

We talked a bit about ACP, getting access and making sure people can afford broadband. But just because you can access it, and you can afford it, doesn't mean that you know that you need it or how to use it. Digital equity is such a big umbrella term, but what does it actually mean to you? What is the FCC's role here?

Digital equity to me means that all communities have equal access to communications, and when Congress passed the bipartisan federal law and invested $65 billion to ensure everyone in America has access to affordable, high-speed, reliable broadband service, it also recognized that connectivity for all should be the rule, not the exception. It also recognized that access for historically underrepresented communities, whether they be communities of color, low-income communities, rural communities, tribal, Latino, needs to be the rule, not the exception.

So, as we make these historic investments, we need to prioritize digital equity to promote opportunity for all. And as part of that, Congress, through a bipartisan directive, ordered us to facilitate equal access to broadband and to prevent and eliminate digital discrimination of access for communities based on income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion or national origin. And so, we adopted rules implementing Congress' requirements and what we did in those rules is we asked providers to act with intentionality as they develop their deployment plans to ensure that everyone is getting equal access to this important service.

It's not a gotcha. We're not trying to get money for the Treasury. We really want them to think about this as a standard business practice. Just like, for example, as they come up with their cybersecurity mitigation plans and risk management, we ask them to be intentional in thinking about their deployment plans, ensuring that they're going to reach all communities.

It sounds like you're confident about the expectations of providers and the commission's existing processes if there are any kinds of violations.

I am. I think that we're going to see moving forward how this shapes itself because this is brand new. We just adopted the rules, as Congress ordered us to do, in October, and I think that what you will see is it will become clearer as we go forward what it is that these providers need to do to ensure that they are meeting Congress' requirement for equal access number one, and preventing and eliminating digital discrimination.

Broadband Mapping Challenges

Some groups, including NTCA, have recently met with your staff and others' to discuss apparent problems with the commission's challenge process and data collection process for the national broadband availability map. How concerned are you about these processes and their roles in the map?

Let's start with the fundamentals. The map is the most accurate map that we have ever had. It was a project years in the making to improve the map to more accurately show where broadband is and where it isn't. But it is, of course, an iterative process. What we have today is a significant improvement from what we had before the broadband data collection.

And we have seen very large improvements from versions of the map getting to where we are, but it's always a moving target because you see deployment happen, and we get the input from the providers, the state and local governments, from stakeholders, from consumers, and individuals. So, it's always going to be an evolving process.

When you think about the money that's going to be coming through NTIA's broadband, equity, access and deployment program and other federal programs that are going to be relying on the commission's maps, where do you see the FCC's role?

The FCC's role is to provide this data and to provide it to each state and other agencies that are going to rely on them, and interagency collaboration is so important. So, it's a continuous process.