American Broadband Deployment Act of 2025

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/2289
Last Updated: July 16, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

ID: C001103

Follow the money

The bill

American Broadband Deployment Act of 2025

HR. 2289, 119th Congress — read as touching Telecommunications.

The sponsor

Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$71,565 raised

23 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Federal Communications Commission" section, p. 888-890 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 532.

April 14, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the geniuses in Congress. The American Broadband Deployment Act of 2025 - because what's more American than gutting environmental and historical preservation reviews to pave the way for more cell towers and cable installations? It's like they're trying to create a new national pastime: "Spot the Lobbyist's Handprint."

Let's dissect this mess, shall we?

**New regulations being created or modified:** The bill amends Section 332(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, effectively neutering local zoning authority and allowing telecom companies to run roughshod over environmental and historical preservation concerns. Because who needs pesky things like "preserving national heritage" or "protecting endangered species" when there are profits to be made?

**Affected industries and sectors:** Telecom giants, cable companies, and construction firms will be the primary beneficiaries of this bill. Expect a surge in campaign donations and lobbying efforts from these industries, as they salivate at the prospect of unfettered access to public lands and reduced regulatory oversight.

**Compliance requirements and timelines:** The bill sets forth a series of timelines for state and local governments to grant or deny requests for authorization to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities. Because what's more efficient than rushing through environmental impact assessments and ignoring community concerns?

**Enforcement mechanisms and penalties:** Don't worry, there are plenty of loopholes and exemptions built into the bill to ensure that telecom companies can operate with impunity. And if they do happen to get caught violating some minor regulation, they'll just pay a slap-on-the-wrist fine and continue business as usual.

**Economic and operational impacts:** The real impact of this bill will be felt by local communities, who will be forced to endure the aesthetic blight of cell towers and cable installations without any meaningful input or recourse. And let's not forget the environmental consequences of fast-tracking construction projects without proper oversight - because what's a few endangered species or contaminated water sources when there are profits to be made?

In conclusion, this bill is a textbook example of regulatory capture, where special interests have hijacked the legislative process to serve their own narrow agendas. It's a disease, really - a cancer that metastasizes through the body politic, corrupting everything it touches. And we're all just along for the ride, watching as our elected officials sell out to the highest bidder and call it "progress."

Related Topics

Telecommunications & Broadband AccessWildlife & Endangered SpeciesPublic Lands & Natural Resources
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$71,565
20 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$2,500
Committees
$0
Individuals
$69,065

No PAC contributions found

1
SAVANNAH TOYOTA
2 transactions
$2,000
2
TYBEE MARKET
1 transaction
$500

No committee contributions found

1
SADOWSKI, GARY T.
2 transactions
$6,600
2
KIMBELL, JEFFREY
2 transactions
$6,600
3
SMITH, BYRON L.
1 transaction
$5,000
4
MUNOZ, DONALD
1 transaction
$4,665
5
RICKS, DAVID A.
1 transaction
$3,300
6
STEERE, WILLIAM C. JR.
1 transaction
$3,300
7
HENNESSY, MARK W.
1 transaction
$3,300
8
MCWANE, C. PHILLIP
1 transaction
$3,300
9
MILNER, STEPHEN DONALD
1 transaction
$3,300
10
BOERNER, CHRISTOPHER
1 transaction
$3,300
11
DAVIS, ROBERT M.
1 transaction
$3,300
12
GATES, WILLIAM H. III
1 transaction
$3,300
13
HEAD, KATHRYN
1 transaction
$3,300
14
MARTIN, JOHN
1 transaction
$3,300
15
O'DAY, DANIEL
1 transaction
$3,300
16
RABAH, TAREK
1 transaction
$3,300
17
HENNESSY, MARK W
1 transaction
$3,300
18
HENNESSY, PAULA B.
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2]

ID: C001120

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEVRON
OrganizationSAN RAMON, CA
$5,000
Sep 4, 2024
2
COMPLETE EMERGENCY CARE HOLDING LLC
OrganizationSOUTHLAKE, TX
$3,500
Mar 11, 2024
3
SANDLIAN REALTY
OrganizationWICHITA, KS
$1,000
Feb 7, 2024
4
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
RUSSELL W H KRIDEL MD PA
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$250
Feb 28, 2023
6
JONES RANCH LLC
OrganizationCORPUS CHRISTI, TX
$250
Mar 13, 2024
7
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
8
MAFRIGE, DAVID
SELF • COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 21, 2023
9
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023
10
ODEN, KEITH
CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST • EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$9,900
Jun 27, 2023

Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12]

ID: A000372

Top Contributors

10

1
CHEVY CHASE ENERGY LLC
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$500
May 19, 2023
2
RHODES, JIMMY MR.
TAXSLAYER • OWNER
IndividualEVANS, GA
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
3
MASSEY, JON G.
NONE • RETIRED
IndividualFOLSOM, LA
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
4
RHODES, KERRY MRS.
NONE • HOMEMAKER
IndividualEVANS, GA
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
5
DORE, WILLIAM J. SR.
NONE • RETIRED
IndividualMOUNTAIN BRK, AL
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
6
BAKER, ROBERT D
DUFFEY SOUTHEAST, INC. • CONSTRUCTION
IndividualCEDARTOWN, GA
$3,300
Nov 5, 2024
7
STEPHENSON, DONNA Y. MR.
NONE • HOMEMAKER
IndividualATLANTA, GA
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023
8
HATCHER, MARILEE MRS.
MAU, INC • SPECIAL EVENT COORDINATOR
IndividualAUGUSTA, GA
$3,300
Dec 11, 2023
9
WINCHESTER, GAYLE MRS.
NONE • RETIRED
IndividualATLANTA, GA
$3,300
Oct 13, 2023
10
STEPHENSON, DONNA Y. MR.
NONE • HOMEMAKER
IndividualATLANTA, GA
$3,300
Dec 31, 2023

Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9]

ID: G000568

Top Contributors

10

1
BUNN, JAMES O.
CENTRAL COAL CO • MINING ENGINEER
IndividualBRISTOL, VA
$3,300
Dec 18, 2024
2
CHARLES, DAVID
MOOD PRODUCTS GROUP LLC • EXECUTIVE
IndividualAUSTIN, TX
$3,300
Dec 4, 2023
3
HAMER, JONATHAN S.
MASTERY CONSULTING • BUSINESS CONSULTANT
IndividualRANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
$3,300
Dec 22, 2023
4
JOURNAY, JUSTIN
3CHI • EXECUTIVE
IndividualFISHERS, IN
$3,300
Dec 22, 2023
5
PATEL, GOPESH
VLS PHARMACY INC • PHARMACIST
IndividualNEW HYDE PARK, NY
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023
6
RAY, RICHIE
RICHIE'S SPECIALTY PHARMACY • PHARMACIST
IndividualTHE WOODLANDS, TX
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023
7
RAY, RICHIE
RICHIE'S SPECIALTY PHARMACY • PHARMACIST
IndividualTHE WOODLANDS, TX
$3,300
Oct 27, 2023
8
WORLEY, JEFFREY
COLUMBIA CONSULTING • EXECUTIVE
IndividualARGYLE, TX
$3,300
Dec 6, 2023
9
BLUMENFELD, JACOB
QUEST MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC • REAL ESTATE
IndividualBALTIMORE, MD
$3,300
Feb 23, 2024
10
CRANE, DAVID
BOSE PUBLIC AFFAIRS GROUP • CONSULTANT
IndividualALEXANDRIA, VA
$3,300
Mar 6, 2024

Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

ID: L000566

Top Contributors

10

1
HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
OrganizationRICHMOND, VA
$1,000
Mar 5, 2024
2
HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
OrganizationRICHMOND, VA
$1,000
Sep 18, 2023
3
WATKINS & EAGER PLLC
OrganizationJACKSON, MS
$1,000
Jun 25, 2024
4
SENECA COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY
OrganizationTIFFIN, OH
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC
OrganizationARLINGTON, VA
$500
Mar 31, 2024
6
CRAWFORD COUNTY CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION
OrganizationMARYSVILLE, OH
$500
Mar 15, 2024
7
BL PARTNERS GROUP LLC
OrganizationARLINGTON, VA
$500
Jun 18, 2023
8
MURPHY, JAMES
INVENERGY LLC • PRESIDENT
IndividualBARRINGTON, IL
$3,300
Oct 20, 2024
9
TAYLOR, KENNETH
OHIO CAT • PRESIDENT/OWNER
IndividualROCKY RIVER, OH
$3,300
Nov 2, 2024
10
ERGEN, CANDY MRS.
DISH NETWORK • SR ADVISOR
IndividualENGLEWOOD, CO
$3,300
Dec 25, 2023

Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9]

ID: H001093

Top Contributors

10

1
HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA
OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA
$3,300
Aug 3, 2023
2
OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Aug 3, 2023
3
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA
OrganizationBELCOURT, ND
$3,300
Aug 3, 2023
4
CHEROKEE NATION
OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK
$2,500
Dec 19, 2023
5
BANKE, BARBARA
JACKSON FAMILY FOUNDATION • EXECUTIVE
IndividualGEYSERVILLE, CA
$6,600
Dec 7, 2023
6
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$6,600
Mar 6, 2024
7
GRIFFIN, KENNETH
CITADEL LLC • FOUNDER CEO
IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL
$6,600
Apr 10, 2023
8
ROWAN, CAROLYN
CAROLYN ROWAN COLLECTION LLC • EXECUTIVE
IndividualGREENWICH, CT
$6,600
Jun 28, 2023
9
ROWAN, MARC
APOLLO MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS • EXECUTIVE
IndividualGREENWICH, CT
$6,600
Jun 28, 2023
10
KIESLER, DOUGLAS M MR.
KIESLER POLICE SUPPLY, INC. • CEO
IndividualGREENVILLE, IN
$6,600
Feb 22, 2023

Rep. Fry, Russell [R-SC-7]

ID: F000478

Top Contributors

10

1
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Feb 20, 2024
2
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Sep 5, 2024
3
RMS LLC
OrganizationHOOVER, AL
$2,500
Sep 5, 2024
4
ROBERT S GUYTON PC
OrganizationMYRTLE BEACH, SC
$1,000
Jun 17, 2024
5
GAMBLE, KATHRYN
UNAKA CO • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Jul 15, 2024
6
AUSTIN, ROBERT
UNAKA CO., INC. • BUSINESSMAN
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Jul 19, 2024
7
MOORE, KEVIN
R.H. MOORE COMPANY, INC. • CONSTRUCTION
IndividualPAWLEYS ISLAND, SC
$6,600
Aug 20, 2024
8
LOWELL, RANDY
BURR FORMAN • ATTORNEY
IndividualISLE OF PALMS, SC
$3,435
Dec 2, 2024
9
GRUBBS, WESLEY
BEACH FORD • CAR DEALER
IndividualMYRTLE BEACH, SC
$3,435
May 30, 2024
10
WOOTEN, GAIL
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMURRELLS INLET, SC
$3,435
Jun 19, 2024

Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14]

ID: W000814

Top Contributors

10

1
TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION - YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO
OrganizationEL PASO, TX
$2,500
Jun 30, 2023
2
SCOTT M. BROWN P.C.
OrganizationANGLETON, TX
$2,500
Aug 13, 2024
3
SCOTT M. BROWN P.C.
OrganizationANGLETON, TX
$2,500
Aug 14, 2024
4
ALABAMA-COUSHATTA TRIBE
OrganizationLIVINGSTON, TX
$1,000
Sep 30, 2024
5
ALLEN BOONE HUMPHRIES ROBINSON LLP
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$1,000
Jul 25, 2023
6
CLARK, LISA M.
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$10,000
Feb 23, 2024
7
SULLIVAN, JOHN R. MR.
SULLIVAN COMPANIES • OWNER
IndividualGALVESTON, TX
$6,600
Oct 31, 2023
8
TEICHMAN, KEVIN MR.
TEICHMAN GROUP LLC • CEO
IndividualFRIENDSWOOD, TX
$6,600
Dec 12, 2023
9
MCCORVEY, MITZY
MCCORVEY INDUSTRIAL FABRICATION • OWNER
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$6,600
Feb 9, 2023
10
MCCORVEY, TONY
MCCORVEY INDUSTRIAL FABRICATION • OWNER
IndividualHOUSTON, TX
$6,600
Feb 9, 2023

Rep. Goldman, Craig A. [R-TX-12]

ID: G000601

Top Contributors

10

1
ALLEN BOONE HUMPHRIES ROBINSON LLP
OrganizationHOUSTON, TX
$3,300
Dec 21, 2023
2
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$3,300
May 23, 2024
3
BENDA, ROBERT D.
WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS INC. • CEO
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Nov 9, 2023
4
BENDA, ROBERT D.
WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS INC. • CEO
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Nov 9, 2023
5
CAMPBELL, CODY
DOUBLE EAGLE ENERGY • FOUNDER AND CO-CEO
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Dec 31, 2023
6
CAMPBELL, CODY
DOUBLE EAGLE ENERGY • FOUNDER AND CO-CEO
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Dec 31, 2023
7
HOLM, NELSON
RENEGADE SWISH • PARTNER
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Nov 13, 2023
8
HOLM, NELSON
RENEGADE SWISH • PARTNER
IndividualFORT WORTH, TX
$6,600
Nov 13, 2023
9
KLEINHEINZ, BURKE
WELLTOWER • INVESTMENTS
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Dec 21, 2023
10
KLEINHEINZ, BURKE
WELLTOWER • INVESTMENTS
IndividualDALLAS, TX
$6,600
Dec 21, 2023

Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]

ID: D000628

Top Contributors

10

1
POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS
OrganizationATMORE, AL
$3,300
Aug 19, 2024
2
SHOOTS, KYLE MR.
SYSTEM SERVICE & ENGINEERING INC • PRESIDENT
IndividualPANAMA CITY, FL
$10,000
Jun 18, 2024
3
CAMAISA, ALLAN
CALIDI BIO • CHAIRMAN AND CEO
IndividualRANCHO SANTA FE, CA
$6,600
Apr 12, 2023
4
PERGOLINI, WILLIAM
AUDIENTIS LLC • PRESIDENT
IndividualROSWELL, GA
$5,000
Sep 2, 2023
5
PERGOLINI, WILLIAM
AUDIENTIS LLC • PRESIDENT
IndividualROSWELL, GA
$5,000
Sep 2, 2023
6
SCHWARZMAN, CHRISTINE
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$5,000
Jun 5, 2024
7
SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN
BLACKSTONE • CEO AND CHAIRMAN
IndividualNEW YORK, NY
$5,000
May 31, 2024
8
D'ISERNIA, MIRIAM A. MS
HOMEMAKER • HOMEMAKER
IndividualPANAMA CITY BEACH, FL
$3,400
Sep 29, 2023
9
PERGOLINI, WILLIAM
IndividualROSWELL, GA
$3,400
Sep 29, 2023
10
SHOOTS, CHRISTINA MRS.
IndividualPANAMA CITY, FL
$3,400
Jun 18, 2024

Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-23]

ID: O000019

Top Contributors

10

1
PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
OrganizationTEMECULA, CA
$3,300
Dec 18, 2023
2
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Nov 11, 2024
3
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Mar 31, 2024
4
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA
$3,300
Jun 6, 2023
5
MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationBANNING, CA
$3,300
Jun 20, 2023
6
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA
$3,300
Jun 6, 2023
7
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Apr 14, 2023
8
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Sep 30, 2023
9
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$3,300
Sep 16, 2024
10
SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK INDIANS
OrganizationPLACERVILLE, CA
$2,000
Oct 24, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 60 nodes and 38 connections (43 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $110,965

Top Donors - Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs18 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 4 helped.

  • +Telecommunicationsconfidence 0.95

    The bill amends the Communications Act of 1934 to streamline permitting for telecommunications service facilities, including wireless and wireline facilities, by setting timeframes for approval, prohibiting moratoria, and deeming requests granted if not acted upon within specified periods (Sections 101, 102, 103). This benefits telecommunications carriers by reducing regulatory delays and costs.

  • +Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.80

    By expediting deployment of communications facilities (including wireless towers and wireline infrastructure), the bill benefits companies that rely on telecommunications infrastructure for services, such as big tech platforms (e.g., Amazon, Google, Meta) that need robust networks for cloud, streaming, and other services (Sections 101-103, 201-204).

  • +Electric Utilitiesconfidence 0.70

    The bill includes provisions for wireline communications facilities and eligible support infrastructure, which may overlap with utility poles and rights-of-way used by electric utilities for broadband deployment, potentially streamlining joint use and reducing delays (Sections 102, 103, 202).

  • Streamlined permitting for placement, construction, or modification of communications facilities could increase demand for construction and engineering services involved in deploying wireless towers, wireline facilities, and related infrastructure (Sections 102, 103, 202).

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Federal Communications Commission

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 888-890AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns strongly with Project 2025's FCC-focused goals by streamlining broadband deployment, reducing regulatory delays, and promoting efficient use of infrastructure investments—directly supporting objectives to end wasteful spending, accelerate connectivity, and improve agency accountability in telecommunications."

Key themes:broadband deploymentregulatory streamlininginfrastructure efficiencyending digital dividereducing bureaucratic delays

— 855 — Federal Communications Commission so a new Administration should redouble efforts to require timely reviews and final actions by agencies with jurisdiction over federal lands, including the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. l Advance America’s space leadership. One of the most significant technological developments of the past few years has been the emergence of a new generation of low-earth orbit satellites like StarLink and Kuiper. This technology can beam a reliable, high-speed Internet signal to nearly any part of the globe at a fraction of the cost of other technologies. This has the potential to significantly accelerate efforts to end the digital divide and disrupt the federal regulatory and subsidy regime that applies to communications networks. The FCC should expedite its work to support this new technology by acting more quickly in its review and approval of applications to launch new satellites. Otherwise, the U.S. risks ceding space leadership to entities based in countries with more friendly regulatory environments. Holding Government Accountable. Federal technology and telecommunica- tions programs have been plagued by a troubling lack of accountability and good governance. They would benefit from stronger oversight and a fresh look at elim- inating outdated regulations that are doing more harm than good. l End wasteful broadband spending policies. Many of the broadband spending policies being pursued by the current Administration are poised to waste taxpayer money while leaving rural communities and unconnected Americans behind. At the same time, the dramatic recent increases in funding through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act mean that the federal government has more than enough resources to meet its broadband connectivity goals. Congress should therefore hold the agencies accountable so that taxpayer money is used effectively to promote broadband connectivity across the nation. To that end, the next Administration should instruct the various departments and agencies that are administering broadband infrastructure funds to direct those resources to communities without adequate Internet infrastructure instead of to places that already enjoy broadband connectivity. Take, for example, the final rules that the Treasury Department adopted in 2022 that govern the expenditure of $350 billion in ARPA funds. Rather than directing those dollars to the rural and other communities that have no Internet infrastructure, the current — 856 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Administration gave the green light for recipients to spend those funds to overbuild existing high-speed networks in communities that already have multiple broadband providers. A new Administration should eliminate government-funded overbuilding of existing networks. l Adopt a national coordinating strategy. Hundreds of billions of infrastructure dollars have been appropriated by Congress or budgeted by agencies over the past couple of years that can be used to end the digital divide. Yet, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, “U.S. broadband efforts are not guided by a national strategy”; instead, “[f]ederal broadband efforts are fragmented and overlapping, with more than 100 programs administered by 15 agencies,” risking overbuilding as well as wasteful duplication.26 Many of these programs remain plagued by inefficiency, further contributing to waste of limited taxpayer dollars. Moreover, the federal government is failing to put appropriate guardrails in place to govern the expenditure of billions in broadband funds. This is the regulatory equivalent of turning the spigot on full blast and then walking away from the hose. There is a worrisome lack of adequate tracking, measurement, and accountability standards governing all of this broadband spending. As a result, we are likely to see headline levels of waste, fraud, and abuse. A new Administration needs to bring fresh oversight to this spending and put a national strategy in place to ensure that the federal government adopts a coordinated approach to its various broadband initiatives. Similarly, the next Administration should ask the FCC to launch a review of its existing broadband programs, including the different components of the USF, with the goal of avoiding duplication, improving efficiency of existing programs, and saving taxpayer money. l Correct the FCC’s regulatory trajectory and encourage competition to improve connectivity. The FCC is a New Deal–era agency. Its history of regulation tends to reflect the view that the federal government should impose heavy-handed regulation rather than relying on competition and market forces to produce optimal outcomes. President Franklin D. Roosevelt recommended that Congress create the FCC in February 1934 for the purposes of establishing “a single Government agency charged with broad authority” over the field of communications.27 Congress subsequently established the FCC through the Communications Act of 1934. Congress has passed a number of additional statutes—some broad, some

Federal Communications Commission

Moderate
Vector: 62%
Pages: 888-890AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on reducing regulatory burdens to foster competition and a market‑friendly broadband environment, but it does not directly address the policy's calls to eliminate government‑funded overbuilding, create a national coordinating strategy, or review FCC programs for duplication."

Key themes:regulatory streamliningcompetition promotionmarket‑friendly regulationsbroadband deployment

— 856 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Administration gave the green light for recipients to spend those funds to overbuild existing high-speed networks in communities that already have multiple broadband providers. A new Administration should eliminate government-funded overbuilding of existing networks. l Adopt a national coordinating strategy. Hundreds of billions of infrastructure dollars have been appropriated by Congress or budgeted by agencies over the past couple of years that can be used to end the digital divide. Yet, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, “U.S. broadband efforts are not guided by a national strategy”; instead, “[f]ederal broadband efforts are fragmented and overlapping, with more than 100 programs administered by 15 agencies,” risking overbuilding as well as wasteful duplication.26 Many of these programs remain plagued by inefficiency, further contributing to waste of limited taxpayer dollars. Moreover, the federal government is failing to put appropriate guardrails in place to govern the expenditure of billions in broadband funds. This is the regulatory equivalent of turning the spigot on full blast and then walking away from the hose. There is a worrisome lack of adequate tracking, measurement, and accountability standards governing all of this broadband spending. As a result, we are likely to see headline levels of waste, fraud, and abuse. A new Administration needs to bring fresh oversight to this spending and put a national strategy in place to ensure that the federal government adopts a coordinated approach to its various broadband initiatives. Similarly, the next Administration should ask the FCC to launch a review of its existing broadband programs, including the different components of the USF, with the goal of avoiding duplication, improving efficiency of existing programs, and saving taxpayer money. l Correct the FCC’s regulatory trajectory and encourage competition to improve connectivity. The FCC is a New Deal–era agency. Its history of regulation tends to reflect the view that the federal government should impose heavy-handed regulation rather than relying on competition and market forces to produce optimal outcomes. President Franklin D. Roosevelt recommended that Congress create the FCC in February 1934 for the purposes of establishing “a single Government agency charged with broad authority” over the field of communications.27 Congress subsequently established the FCC through the Communications Act of 1934. Congress has passed a number of additional statutes—some broad, some — 857 — Federal Communications Commission narrow—that pertain to the FCC’s authority, including most significantly the Telecommunications Act of 1996,28 which opened up markets for greater competition and largely deregulated industry segments. Technological change in the connectivity sector is occurring rapidly. We are now seeing an unprecedented level of convergence, innovation, and competition in the market for connectivity. On the one hand, traditional cable providers like Charter are now offering mobile wireless services to consumers in direct competition with traditional wireless companies like Verizon. On the other hand, a new generation of low-earth orbit satellite services like StarLink and Amazon’s Project Kuiper stand to offer high- speed home broadband in competition with legacy providers. Furthermore, broadcasters are offering high-speed downloads directly to consumers over spectrum that previously provided only TV service. These rapidly evolving market conditions counsel in favor of eliminating many of the heavy-handed FCC regulations that were adopted in an era when every technology operated in a silo. These include many of the FCC’s media ownership rules, which can have the effect of restricting investment and competition because those regulations assume a far more limited set of competitors for advertising dollars than exist today, as well as its universal service requirements. Ultimately, FCC reliance on competition and innovation is vital if the agency is to deliver optimal outcomes for the American public. The FCC should engage in a serious top-to-bottom review of its regulations and take steps to rescind any that are overly cumbersome or outdated. The Commission should focus its efforts on creating a market-friendly regulatory environment that fosters innovation and competition from a wide range of actors, including cable-based, broadband-based, and satellite- based Internet providers. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective enterprise of individuals involved in the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume. While this chapter identifies certain issues on which the contributors did not all agree, the author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any other individual.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Weak
Vector: 63%
Pages: 548-550AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on broadband deployment and streamlining telecom regulations, while the Project 2025 HUD section addresses housing market integrity, DEI/ESG reforms, zoning barriers to housing supply, and fair housing policies—there is minimal thematic overlap beyond a shared interest in reducing regulatory delays."

Key themes:regulatory reformzoningstreamlining approval processes

— 515 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 25. Process must prioritize where political leadership can implement administrative reforms through regulatory action and subregulatory guidance reforms. 26. China and other foreign nations should not be able to disrupt our nation’s housing markets, including by artificially driving up prices and reducing affordability and access to housing for Americans who are crowded out of the market by such market participation. 27. These initiatives are maintained under such designations as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); black, indigenous, Pacific Islander, and other people of color (BIPOC); and environmental, social, and governance (ESG). 28. At a minimum, these efforts duplicate what the federal government already collects and assesses; at worst, they institute arbitrary procedures in real estate appraisal practices that undermine integrity and perversely introduce arbitrary biases into what should be an unbiased system for determining financial value. 29. Revise regulatory and subregulatory guidance, where applicable within statutory authorities, that adds unnecessary delay and costs to the construction and development of new housing and has been estimated to account for about 40 percent of new housing unit costs in multifamily housing. 30. The Biden Administration has issued a proposed rule to replace the Trump Administration’s “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice” rule that had repealed earlier rules expanding AFFH enforcement. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Fair Housing, “Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 153 (August 7, 2020), pp. 47899–47912, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-08-07/pdf/2020-16320.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 27 (February 9, 2023), pp. 8516–8590, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-07-16/pdf/2015-17032.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 31. Certain pilot initiatives may encourage greater take-up of loan products designed for faster equity accumulation, including loans with shorter terms and accelerated amortization schedules. In concept, the FHA’s Home Equity Accelerator Loan (HEAL) and Good Neighbor Next Door (GNND) pilot initiatives might lead to meaningful wealth generation for first-time buyers, but they should be available to all eligible households only when they do not arbitrarily discriminate based on race or other characteristics. 32. Housing supply does remain a problem in the U.S., but constructing more units at the low end of the market will not solve the problem. Investors and developers can deliver at more efficient cost new units that will allow for greater upward mobility of rental and ownership housing stock and better target increased construction of mid-tier rental units. Further, and more fundamental to the housing supply challenge in markets across the U.S., localities can consider revising land use, zoning, and building regulations that constrict new housing development, adding time delays and costs that impede construction. Federal housing policy should get out of the way where possible and minimize the distortive impact that stimulating greater demand through loose lending can have in driving up housing prices for households that are looking for affordable entry into the housing market. 33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, “Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status,” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 91 (May 10, 2019), pp. 20589–20595, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-05-10/pdf/2019-09566.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 34. Reforms should contemplate rent payment flexibilities, allow escrow savings, and set maximum term limits that can reduce implicit penalties for increasing household incomes over eligibility terms for housing assistance and reweight waiting-list prioritization for two-parent households. 35. Some PHAs have been able to implement work requirements and term limit policies in various congressionally authorized demonstration programs, notably the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program established in 1996 for 39 PHAs (Congress has since authorized another 100 PHAs) in which participating MTW PHAs were given authority to implement rent reforms, work requirements and other experimental policies in rental assistance programs along with flexibilities in the use of capital and operating appropriations. 36. The FSS program has a general five-year term with a possible two-year extension, which could be applied at the term limit for overall benefits, and certain PHAs have imposed five-year to seven-year term limits. Families in these programs build escrow savings during their term eligibility that helps to facilitate successful transitions to family self-sufficiency and unassisted housing.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills