Carr cites screen time concerns, is accused of trying to be “the nation’s parent.”
The Federal Communications Commission was roundly criticized today for proposing to scale back or eliminate E-Rate, a $2 billion-a-year Universal Service program that provides discounts for telecom services and equipment in schools and libraries.
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said E-Rate should be changed because students are getting too much screen time. He led a 2-1 vote to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes changes and asks the public to comment on them.
“Over the last decade, school districts across the country experimented with a massive increase in screen time for students,” Carr said at today’s meeting.
Carr blamed schools for replacing books and pencils with digital tools and said data shows “that more than half of students now use a computer for up to four hours a day, and a quarter of them spend more than four hours on screens.” He said that E-Rate began in 1997 “with a clear focus—supporting basic Internet access to schools and libraries for educational purposes,” but has “expanded exponentially.”
“We seek comment on whether the program should be reoriented in light of all of the above developments, as well as the increase in connectivity to schools and libraries across the country since 1997,” Carr said.
Despite Carr’s use of the word “reoriented,” the options on the table include shutting down E-Rate. This is made clear in a public draft of the NPRM, which asks for comment on whether E-Rate should be limited or sunset:
Should the E-Rate program be limited or sunset to reflect today’s extensive connectivity rates? At what point should policymakers conclude that the program’s core objective has been achieved? We seek comment on whether Congress intended E-Rate to operate indefinitely, regardless of the extent to which schools and libraries have achieved universal connectivity.
Commissioner Anna Gomez, the FCC’s only Democrat, asked Carr’s office to remove the language seeking comment on whether to sunset the E-Rate program. The chair’s office declined that request, a spokesperson for Gomez told Ars today.
Gomez said at today’s meeting that the NPRM “has been erroneously portrayed as an inquiry into screen time” in order to float “speculative and unwarranted proposals, including whether the Commission should terminate the E-Rate program or dramatically limit its scope to only rural areas or areas served by a single provider. These proposals reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the challenges schools and libraries face today and reveal a striking cognitive dissonance at the core of this item.”
Issuing an NPRM is the first major step toward changing or ending the program. The FCC could make a final decision in a few months, and opponents may challenge that decision in court. Legal challenges are likely to argue that the FCC exceeded the authority granted to the agency by Congress, particularly if Carr tries to end or dramatically reduce the program.
The FCC’s draft NPRM argues that although Congress created the program, the purpose for which it was created may no longer exist. Congress authorized E-Rate in the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and the FCC implemented the program the next year. E-Rate provides discounts of 20 percent to 90 percent for eligible services and equipment.
“In establishing the program in 1996, Congress was addressing a specific problem: limited access to advanced telecommunications and Internet services in schools and libraries,” the FCC proposal said. “Given the substantial expansion of broadband access in schools and libraries over the last three decades, we seek comment on whether and to what extent the E-Rate program has fulfilled that mission and whether continued funding is consistent with Congress’s original objective.”
Gomez said E-Rate helps ensure that children in low-income neighborhoods and rural communities get “the same shot at a digital education as anyone else.” She said concerns about screen time affecting children’s development and mental health are “real and worth taking seriously,” but that “those conversations belong in homes, classrooms, pediatricians’ offices, and with state, local, and federal legislators. Policing children’s behavior in schools goes far beyond our stated mandate. The FCC is not the nation’s parent. It is not the nation’s teacher. And it is not the nation’s school board.”
She added that “Congress did not ask the FCC to revisit or narrow the program’s scope” or “intend for federal connectivity support to hinge on anyone’s preferred educational philosophies or screen-time preferences.”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said the FCC proposal “goes far beyond reviewing the impact of screen time on students and undermines educational equality, harms our economic competitiveness, and threatens to reverse three decades of settled law. The FCC should be focused on strengthening E-Rate and closing the digital divide, not finding new excuses to disconnect the children who need it the most.”
E-Rate typically distributes over $2 billion a year. It has a funding cap of $5.2 billion, but actual payouts are based on demand and the application approval rate. E-Rate and other Universal Service Fund (USF) programs are paid for by fees imposed on phone companies, which usually pass the cost on to consumers on their monthly bills.
The Carr FCC already scaled E-Rate back last year by ending funding for schools and libraries to lend out Wi-Fi hotspots. The FCC also stopped funding for Wi-Fi service on school buses. The changes, backed by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), were described as “cruel” by advocates.
Advocacy groups had similar criticism for today’s vote. “Instead of asking whether E-Rate should be terminated, the FCC should be asking how to make it stronger,” said Joey Wender, executive director of the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition (SHLB). Wender said the vote is “an attack on school and library funding that these institutions can’t afford to lose, particularly in the most disadvantaged rural and urban communities.”
The group launched a “Save our E-Rate” page to urge people to contact elected officials and to submit comments when the FCC opens the comment window. The FCC docket is at this link.
Other broadband-focused advocacy groups weighed in against the Carr plan.
“FCC Chair Carr continues to show a pattern seizing politically motivated opportunities to cast doubt on long-standing, successful agency efforts, including core Universal Service Fund programs like E-Rate and Lifeline,” said Alisa Valentin, broadband policy director at advocacy group Public Knowledge. “Congress should be concerned that this FCC is getting ahead of its efforts to modernize USF programs by creating misleading narratives and distorting the debate.”
Revati Prasad, executive director of the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, said that “E-Rate transformed Internet access for over 100,000 schools and 11,000 libraries nationwide, connecting millions of students and library patrons to educational opportunities, government services, information, healthcare, and much more. At a time when our economy and society are increasingly moving online, it is unfathomable that FCC Chairman Brendan Carr would suggest terminating or scaling back a program that nearly every community in the US relies upon.”
Source: Ars Technica
