The cloaking device seems to be working.
Rural development subsidies, including broadband construction programs, do not seem to be among the hot button issues as the debate in Washington continues over the trillion-dollar farm and welfare package known as the farm bill.
There are major differences between the broadband subsidies approved earlier this year by the republican controlled house and the democrat controlled senate. The house version more or less continues the current program, maintaining the focus on loans and keeping it at $25 million per year. The senate version doubles the funding to $50 million a year, allows direct grants as well as loans and sets up a vaguely worded rural gigabit community pilot project.
The senate’s version makes it possible for more communities to apply, raising the population limit from 20,000 to 50,000. On the other hand, only areas with one incumbent service provider (or none) are eligible. The current program allows funding for areas with as many as two incumbents. Other provisions bake a 4 Mbps down/1 Mbps up acceptable service level into law and allow incumbents to directly challenge projects.
The house version also creates a protest process for incumbents, and requires the USDA to consider the cost of upgrading existing facilities rather than financing a new competitor. On the whole, cable and telco lobbyists should be pleased.
The real wrangling is over the two big ticket items – food stamps and crop price and insurance subsidies – but several side battles have emerged. Labelling requirements for imported food, California’s rules regarding the treatment of farm animals and requirements for adding ethanol to gasoline are among the smaller issues getting attention in the media and, it appears, from the senate and house staffers who are doing the grunt work.
Nothing yet, though, about rural development programs.