The program is unlikely to be a success in the future, either. It missed the boat.
I live in a rural exurb. Previously, people who needed broadband Internet, me included, bought property here near main roads, near schools, or near other government offices. There was a real need in the rest of the county. Note, was, not is.
At this point, people out here who need broadband buy wherever, and if it doesn’t have fiber, they get Starlink.
I understand the logic of not supporting what was then a monopoly, but the result of that is, literally no one was connected, a lot of money was wasted, and rural people now already have a solution without any help from the federal government.
Now Starlink has a competitor rolling out, and it won’t be a monopoly any more, either.
Agree. The solution is right in front of their eyes with Starlink and it would help more people quickly and can be subsidized for a whole lot less. It might have less performance but something is better than nothing while the network is built out, if it ever happens.
I would take the other side of a bet, on satellite becoming dominant. Terrestrial WISPs are going to have an _enormous_ systematic advantage in delivering high speed with relatively little capital investment, given the big leaps forward we're seeing with stuff like Project Taara. https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-google-taara-chip-internet-by-light/
Depends on location. I have owned horses most of my life, and places where you can keep horses tend to be more remote. Satellite is often a very good option for scattered remote places.
Sure, there's a niche for satellite. I've used BGAN a fair bit, and StarLink is a huge step forwards relative to that. But WISPs, using stuff like Ubiquiti's gear, are already pretty popular in places that are rural but can be linked back to suburban/urban areas with a handful of 20-30 mile tightbeam links. And Taara is going to significantly boost the bandwidth you can get on that kind of system.
The market of people who are in _truly_ remote places, not within, say, a fifty miles of a major freeway, is quite small.
Ditto my daughter who lives in rural California. I’ll be happy when there’s a competitor to StarLink but perhaps less so if there are more satellites mucking up the skies.
Many are missing the big picture. This specific example isn’t as important as this is the norm for our government. This isn’t an outlier.
The government is bad at building stuff because it’s preoccupied with policy and process. It can’t deliver because it’s stuck in the mud. What’s most frustrating is it can deliver but for the processes. The true outliers are when an emergency happens and we see what can happen. A bridge is reconstructed in 3 weeks when normally it takes 3 years? Why?
We need leaders to say enough is enough and due process improvements that remove low value processes and streamline things with a focus on doing things faster.
I feel like this article doesn’t address some basic questions. Why does this program make any sense? You can get high speed broadband in any rural area through Starlink.
What's lost here is basic. Why can't the world wait long enough to understand the consequences of actions? Establishing a survey line - like a subdivision lot - is essentially permanent. Most of the infrastructure we build has a useful life longer than one generation. Built well, it often serves several generations.
We have allowed technologies like cell phones and social media to inflict considerable damage on people with no upfront analysis at all. We don't have to do that with public infrastructure or the use of public lands.
It's harder than this makes it seem. For example, the Vogtle nuclear plant in Georgia started building before the final design was completely fixed, and this led to disastrous cost overruns and delays.
That wasn’t a change in design, it was a failure to follow it. The variance in levelness of the concrete reactor bed allowed by the NRC license was one inch, but when measured after construction was found to be 4 inches, so they tried to get the license amended but were unsuccessful and had to redo all the work. They also had to redo another concrete section because the rebars were installed with improper spacing. Maybe the requirements were too strict, but this was poor engineering management and oversight
One reason congress imposed so many requirements is in a failed effort to protect the program from being scammed or turned into a subsidy of wealthy telecom providers as happened under the first Trump administration.
Another point here is that despite all the claims that no building took place, I know people in rural appalachia who have got fiber optic connections because of federal programs - some from Biden's stimulus, some from as far back as Obama.
This is outstanding, Sam! Agile applied to programs could improve delivery in so many program areas in addition to broadband — health, national security, housing, etc. Thanks!
The underlying assumption of this post is either just false or an evasion. The program was structured this way because during the first Trump administration, the preceding program was turned into a vast machine for grifting. You can't evaluate these things as if politics doesn't happen or as if all participants want the same thing - many of the participants just want to line their own pockets and Congress was prudent to try to prevent another massive theft - maybe not prudent enough.
I worked on a small government EIS that ended up 750 pages. The industry’s environmental lawyer pointed out that an EIS isn’t designed to produce new information except in its conclusions, simply repackage old information, and short links to the sources and literature would make it an actually readable and actionable document. [But of course the absence of 700 of those pages would make it easier to litigate.]
Good article. The construction industry does use a form of Agile: Design-Build. They start the foundations and lower floors while the upper floors are still being designed.
A much simpler program that would have cost much less is to have the FCC (or whichever department runs this) compile an aggregate map based on all existing broadband providers coverage maps (these all exist, but are probably not in a common format) and then allow subsides to anyone who had no coverage according to the central map to buy the cheapest broadband (with some minimal base specifications) to get access privately. Currently the cheapest in most locations would be StarLink ($200 terminal and $120/month) but other satellite or WiMax providers could also compete. It really doesn’t make sense to string or bury miles of fiber optic cables across West Virginia hollers and Nevada salt flats to reach the tiny number of households who choose to live there and who may not even want to be online.
The program is unlikely to be a success in the future, either. It missed the boat.
I live in a rural exurb. Previously, people who needed broadband Internet, me included, bought property here near main roads, near schools, or near other government offices. There was a real need in the rest of the county. Note, was, not is.
At this point, people out here who need broadband buy wherever, and if it doesn’t have fiber, they get Starlink.
I understand the logic of not supporting what was then a monopoly, but the result of that is, literally no one was connected, a lot of money was wasted, and rural people now already have a solution without any help from the federal government.
Now Starlink has a competitor rolling out, and it won’t be a monopoly any more, either.
Agree. The solution is right in front of their eyes with Starlink and it would help more people quickly and can be subsidized for a whole lot less. It might have less performance but something is better than nothing while the network is built out, if it ever happens.
I would take the other side of a bet, on satellite becoming dominant. Terrestrial WISPs are going to have an _enormous_ systematic advantage in delivering high speed with relatively little capital investment, given the big leaps forward we're seeing with stuff like Project Taara. https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-google-taara-chip-internet-by-light/
Depends on location. I have owned horses most of my life, and places where you can keep horses tend to be more remote. Satellite is often a very good option for scattered remote places.
Sure, there's a niche for satellite. I've used BGAN a fair bit, and StarLink is a huge step forwards relative to that. But WISPs, using stuff like Ubiquiti's gear, are already pretty popular in places that are rural but can be linked back to suburban/urban areas with a handful of 20-30 mile tightbeam links. And Taara is going to significantly boost the bandwidth you can get on that kind of system.
The market of people who are in _truly_ remote places, not within, say, a fifty miles of a major freeway, is quite small.
Ditto my daughter who lives in rural California. I’ll be happy when there’s a competitor to StarLink but perhaps less so if there are more satellites mucking up the skies.
Many are missing the big picture. This specific example isn’t as important as this is the norm for our government. This isn’t an outlier.
The government is bad at building stuff because it’s preoccupied with policy and process. It can’t deliver because it’s stuck in the mud. What’s most frustrating is it can deliver but for the processes. The true outliers are when an emergency happens and we see what can happen. A bridge is reconstructed in 3 weeks when normally it takes 3 years? Why?
We need leaders to say enough is enough and due process improvements that remove low value processes and streamline things with a focus on doing things faster.
I feel like this article doesn’t address some basic questions. Why does this program make any sense? You can get high speed broadband in any rural area through Starlink.
Maybe I'm being too paranoid (or maybe not), but there's the possibility that regions could be excluded from Starlink for politician reasons.
What's lost here is basic. Why can't the world wait long enough to understand the consequences of actions? Establishing a survey line - like a subdivision lot - is essentially permanent. Most of the infrastructure we build has a useful life longer than one generation. Built well, it often serves several generations.
We have allowed technologies like cell phones and social media to inflict considerable damage on people with no upfront analysis at all. We don't have to do that with public infrastructure or the use of public lands.
It's harder than this makes it seem. For example, the Vogtle nuclear plant in Georgia started building before the final design was completely fixed, and this led to disastrous cost overruns and delays.
That wasn’t a change in design, it was a failure to follow it. The variance in levelness of the concrete reactor bed allowed by the NRC license was one inch, but when measured after construction was found to be 4 inches, so they tried to get the license amended but were unsuccessful and had to redo all the work. They also had to redo another concrete section because the rebars were installed with improper spacing. Maybe the requirements were too strict, but this was poor engineering management and oversight
One reason congress imposed so many requirements is in a failed effort to protect the program from being scammed or turned into a subsidy of wealthy telecom providers as happened under the first Trump administration.
https://www.techdirt.com/2023/06/28/the-trump-fcc-wasted-millions-in-broadband-subsidies-in-a-giant-mess-government-is-still-trying-to-clean-up/
Another point here is that despite all the claims that no building took place, I know people in rural appalachia who have got fiber optic connections because of federal programs - some from Biden's stimulus, some from as far back as Obama.
https://www.techdirt.com/2025/02/24/arpa-is-quietly-funding-cheap-50-65-a-month-community-owned-gigabit-fiber-access-to-long-neglected-neighborhoods/
This is outstanding, Sam! Agile applied to programs could improve delivery in so many program areas in addition to broadband — health, national security, housing, etc. Thanks!
“Hey, don’t blame us. We were just following the documented process.” The ultimate CYA. Still true at corporate too.
The underlying assumption of this post is either just false or an evasion. The program was structured this way because during the first Trump administration, the preceding program was turned into a vast machine for grifting. You can't evaluate these things as if politics doesn't happen or as if all participants want the same thing - many of the participants just want to line their own pockets and Congress was prudent to try to prevent another massive theft - maybe not prudent enough.
I worked on a small government EIS that ended up 750 pages. The industry’s environmental lawyer pointed out that an EIS isn’t designed to produce new information except in its conclusions, simply repackage old information, and short links to the sources and literature would make it an actually readable and actionable document. [But of course the absence of 700 of those pages would make it easier to litigate.]
Good article. The construction industry does use a form of Agile: Design-Build. They start the foundations and lower floors while the upper floors are still being designed.
https://bsky.app/profile/karlbode.com/post/3llokzihmnk25
https://www.techdirt.com/2025/02/24/arpa-is-quietly-funding-cheap-50-65-a-month-community-owned-gigabit-fiber-access-to-long-neglected-neighborhoods/
A much simpler program that would have cost much less is to have the FCC (or whichever department runs this) compile an aggregate map based on all existing broadband providers coverage maps (these all exist, but are probably not in a common format) and then allow subsides to anyone who had no coverage according to the central map to buy the cheapest broadband (with some minimal base specifications) to get access privately. Currently the cheapest in most locations would be StarLink ($200 terminal and $120/month) but other satellite or WiMax providers could also compete. It really doesn’t make sense to string or bury miles of fiber optic cables across West Virginia hollers and Nevada salt flats to reach the tiny number of households who choose to live there and who may not even want to be online.