Broadband stimulus funds should be carefully spent, going to the ...

To avoid wasting taxpayers’ dollars, agencies need to make sure the programs are properly structured, said committee Ranking Member Joe Barton of Texas and Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Cliff Stearns of Florida. They asked the agencies to submit answers by March 31 to six questions dealing with how the money should be spent: (1) Should funding go first to projects in states where mapping programs are completed? Since the funds are to be disbursed in three installments, this would give an incentive to other states to complete mapping and identify areas most in need of broadband, the letter said. (2) Should unserved areas have priority over underserved? Giving money to underserved areas is “more likely to distort the marketplace,” the letter said. (3) Should funding to underserved areas be directed to stimulating demand for service, rather than creating a new supply? (4) Should the criteria for grant allocations be technologically and competitively neutral? (5) Should grant decisions be based on whether projects would be sustainable without more government funding? Some potential applicants view the Universal Service Fund as a potential source of continued funding, once grant money is used up, the letter said. But the USF program is “bloated and inefficient,” and already costs subscribers $7 billion a year, it said. (6) Should grants be prioritized to go first to projects that “have the most impact for the least amount of taxpayer dollars?”