A former federal broadband official has voiced concerns that the Trump administration’s recent policy changes could disadvantage rural Americans by reducing access to reliable, high-speed Internet. The move is expected to benefit Elon Musk’s satellite service, Starlink, while diminishing support for fiber-optic network expansion.
Evan Feinman, who served as the director of the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, criticized the decision in a farewell email to colleagues. “Stranding rural America with worse Internet to enrich the world’s richest man is yet another betrayal by Washington,” he wrote.
Shift in Priorities
The BEAD program was initially designed to prioritize fiber-optic networks, which provide high-speed, scalable connectivity. However, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently announced that the Trump administration would reverse this priority, paving the way for increased use of satellite-based services like Starlink.
Feinman warned that this decision undermines the program’s long-term goals. During the Biden administration, fiber was identified as the most future-proof technology, essential for supporting both residential broadband and advanced wireless networks. In contrast, satellites offer slower speeds and higher latency, making them less suitable for many users.
Delays and Uncertainty
The policy shift could also delay broadband projects that are already underway. States such as Delaware, Louisiana, and Nevada had received approval for their final broadband proposals before the change in administration. Feinman noted that these states are now in a state of uncertainty as they await further guidance.
“Shovels could already be in the ground,” Feinman emphasized, suggesting that the delay is unnecessary and harmful. He also expressed concern that states may be forced to abandon their existing plans and restart the selection process, wasting both time and taxpayer money.
Removal of Previous Requirements
In addition to altering the funding priorities, the administration plans to remove several provisions related to labor standards, climate resiliency, and affordability. Feinman viewed these changes as minor, stating that they were more politically symbolic than practically impactful.
However, he cautioned that further adjustments, such as imposing strict per-location spending limits, could have a significant effect. While acknowledging that some limits may be reasonable, he warned that low caps could disproportionately benefit satellite providers like Starlink and Amazon’s Kuiper, leading to fewer fiber-optic installations.
Call for Action
Feinman urged both lawmakers and the public to resist these changes, emphasizing the importance of maintaining fiber-optic expansion for long-term broadband development. He called on Congress and the administration to reconsider the policy shift, arguing that communities should not be forced to accept lower-quality Internet access.
“Fix the program by removing unnecessary regulations, not by cutting support for fiber,” Feinman wrote. “States deserve the flexibility to choose the best technology for their residents.”
With many states on the verge of launching broadband projects, Feinman’s departure leaves a critical warning about the potential consequences of prioritizing short-term cost savings over long-term connectivity for rural America.
