President Trump Targets Digital Equity Act —What It Means for Communities and the Future of Connectivity - Episode 646 of the Community Broadband Bits Podcast

Christopher Mitchell (00:11):
Welcome to another episode of the Community Broadband Bit podcast. I'm Christopher Mitchell, and I'm in St. Paul, Minnesota, where the Timberwolves are about to take on the Golden State Warriors in game two of the playoffs. As we are recording, you are listening [00:00:30] to this after the game ends, so please, no spoilers, don't tell me who wins. I'm here with Angela Siefer, many time guests, the Executive Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance. Welcome back to the show. Angela.

Angela Siefer (00:45):
Thank you so much, Chris, for having me.

Christopher Mitchell (00:47):
And we also have Amy Huffman, who's been on not only this show, but multiple other shows that we've done. The Policy Director at NDIA, the National Digital Inclusion Alliance. Welcome.

Amy Huffman (00:59):
Thanks for having me, Chris. [00:01:00] I'm happy to be here.

Christopher Mitchell (01:02):
So we are recording this show, and I mean we all enjoy talking to each other, but obviously we would prefer not to be these circumstances. We're recording this show the evening after a statement on Truth Social that was reposted elsewhere, of course, afterwards from President Trump in which he says, we'll read this in a little bit, but broadly we're going to talk about the Digital Equity Act, which today was announced by the President [00:01:30] in a semi-official manner that the program is unconstitutional and would be canceled. We're going to try to work through what that means, but I don't know if Angela, as the person that everyone looks to for direction on these things, do you have any opening thoughts about it?

Angela Siefer (01:51):
I certainly do. Chris, any that you would care to share publicly? Sure. In fact, we did put out a statement [00:02:00] we got on this right away because as lots of folks know, we care a lot about the Digital Equity Act. So calling the Digital Equity Act unconstitutional, it's not only incorrect, it hurts millions of Americans. These are folks who need digital navigation support home Internet devices to find jobs, access healthcare, compete in today's modern economy. So it's painful not only for the digital inclusion programs [00:02:30] that were assuming these funds would be there for them to extend their work, but for the actual people who were going to be supported by those dollars.

Christopher Mitchell (02:43):
Yes, and Amy, we're going to get into the substance of it in a second, but I also wasn't sure, I know that NDIA released a blog post covering what Angela just said basically, but is there anything else you'd want to add before we really dig in?

Amy Huffman (02:59):
Yeah, [00:03:00] I mean, I think Angela covered it. It's disappointing

Christopher Mitchell (03:06):
You're in contact with thousands of people who are trying to turn this money into economic productivity for the country. It's kind of a gut punch.

Amy Huffman (03:15):
Yeah, that's a gut punch is probably a better way to frame it than disappointing. Look, to be honest, we've been expecting something. The news was not delivered in the way that I expected it [00:03:30] to be frank. I did not expect this to rise to the level of a presidential Truth Social post, but it did. The reason we've been expecting this is because the word equity is in the title of the act, and while the three of us in our community knows that the Digital Equity Act is digital equity is about making sure people can get connected [00:04:00] and stay online safely, it's about making sure that people have the skills that they need to do the work that is of the 21st century. So it's more than it what's in the title, but we and I think rightly thought that this would be reduced to one word eventually, and that's what we're seeing here today, and [00:04:30] it's unfortunate and there's a lot more to digital equity that we're excited to share.

Christopher Mitchell (04:38):
Yes. So we'll talk about that just so people are familiar. I'll read it quickly. It's not very long. President Trump wrote on Truth Social: I have spoken with my wonderful Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick, and we agree the Biden-Harris, so-called Digital Equity Act is totally unconstitutional. No more woke [00:05:00] handouts based on race. The digital equity program is a racist and illegal 2.5 billion giveaway. I am ending this immediately in saving taxpayers billions of dollars. So I feel like the first thing that I would like to discuss about that is this notion, which I feel like may be echoed uncritically by some, that the Digital Equity Act is focused on race. [00:05:30] Where does the, I'll ask you first, Amy, I guess where does RACE come into the Digital Equity Act?

Amy Huffman (05:41):
So Congress wrote the law, I should say that first. Yes.

Christopher Mitchell (05:46):
Very good. Yeah.

Amy Huffman (05:46):
This is a law. The Digital Equity Act was passed in 2021 as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the law was intended to, [00:06:00] as Congress wrote, it was intended to make sure that, look, the digital divide impacts everyone, but there are certain populations that it disproportionately affects and because of different circumstances, either institutional or systemic issues that keep people offline poverty, people being in rural areas, health disparities race, yes. Is one of them. [00:06:30] And so the way Congress designed the law was that the funds were intended to be spent to make sure that those that were disproportionately affected by the general divide were served by the funds that the taxpayer dollars that are going to close the digital divide. The way they structured it though was that they designed or they made a term called covered populations and defined eight covered populations. So [00:07:00] racial and ethnic minorities are one of the eight

Christopher Mitchell (07:02):
Covered. No, they must be all eight. I'm sure that that's the way it is.

Amy Huffman (07:06):
They are one, correct. They're

Christopher Mitchell (07:08):
One. They're one of eight categories,

Amy Huffman (07:10):
Just one of eight categories that anyone who is receiving the funds is then required to serve. And the other categories are veterans, older adults or seniors, rural folks, folks with low literacy, [00:07:30] folks with low incomes. I'm blanking on the other ones, but you get the gist, right.

Christopher Mitchell (07:39):
Angela's leaning forward because they've been tattooed on our eyelids.

Amy Huffman (07:42):
I know. Disabled. Yep. Yep. That's one. Yeah. And the way people are is you typically are not just one of these categories. We don't [00:08:00] fit into nice little square boxes.

Christopher Mitchell (08:03):
Veterans often live in rural areas.

Amy Huffman (08:06):
Veterans often live in rural areas, is sometimes older. Adults are also people of color. So there's a lot of different, the way the categories bleed together when you serve someone getting them computer or you help them get digital skills, it's because they need the digital skills. It's normally not because of [00:08:30] the box that they're in, and they often check off multiple of those boxes.

Christopher Mitchell (08:38):
Angela, you've been at this for a while. Go ahead and then I'll ask my question.

Angela Siefer (08:41):
Yeah, just want to note too that the Digital Equity Act did say there should be no discrimination

Christopher Mitchell (08:48):
Right

Angela Siefer (08:48):
Now.

Christopher Mitchell (08:49):
Just I think it's entirely possible that there could be in a future, which we did not see this intervention from the President, that the courts, [00:09:00] it is possible the courts would've said, you know what? It is impermissible to include race on these covered populations. And at that point, the way that this works, this is not the first time Congress has crafted a complicated program that then has a part of it that has decided to be impermissible. At that point, we would have seven categories on which states would be focused on. That is the way we typically do these things. I think Angela, that's my impression.

Angela Siefer (09:30):
[00:09:30] I also offer though, Chris, so NDIA has over 2000 affiliates, which are organizations providing these kinds of digital inclusion services and some of whom have applied for this funding and thought they were going to participate in this. We know who they serve and they serve. People who are in these different categories are covered populations, as Amy said. So who they tend to serve are individuals for low income

(09:58):
Regardless of where they live [00:10:00] and what other covered population they might fall into. They're low income. This is a community center. It's a library. When I need tech help, I can tell you, I usually just go as my husband or I call my daughter or one of the NDIA staff. I tend not to go to the Jewish Family Services, which is nearby my house and they have digital navigators. I tend not to, I don't ever go there and ask them. So folks use those services when they don't have their [00:10:30] own social system of those services around them already. So this is not as if a wealthy person of color would, it just doesn't work like that. That's not how this is all structured and not as if it's even structured intentionally. It's just how society has ended up.

Christopher Mitchell (10:49):
And so I think what I would say from that is just again, thinking about this from the point of view of a normal system, if the courts heard this challenge, [00:11:00] they could very well decide that this is not a use of race that is problematic from the point of view of the constitution. I think they would probably find that. My point is more that the worst case scenario, the way that you deal with this would be to trim out that small portion. It's not at all to suggest that. It would be correct to say that, Angela, I've been to nearly every Net Inclusion, and I say that if people could sneak in, it might be too late to get tickets. So I'm just going to encourage people to sneak in. No, I'm hearing I'm not going to encourage 'em to sneak [00:11:30] into

Amy Huffman (11:31):
River. We have plenty

Angela Siefer (11:32):
Of tickets tell 'em to come fine. We actually do have tickets because some people are not able to come because,

Christopher Mitchell (11:38):
Okay. Net Inclusion is at Gila River on the 20th through the 22nd, I believe.

Angela Siefer (11:44):
Very good, Chris.

Christopher Mitchell (11:48):
And at any rate, I've met these people. There's not a single person in there that is going to turn away on the basis of race. Not if you're white, not if you're a different race. These are people who are out there who have spent their lives often in service to other people [00:12:00] or are seeking to leave their lives in service to other people, helping to share these skills. So things that we've covered, this is not a program that is unconstitutional. Nonetheless, we now have to proceed in that the President of the United States has said that it is. We also know from four and a half years of experience with President Trump that he will sometimes say things in social media that are not turned into [00:12:30] policy. And so I'm curious how you are reacting to this.

Angela Siefer (12:35):
And for that reason, we put out a statement where no curse words were used, Chris, I think we should all get a cookie for that. Definitely some frustration here. We were being very forthright, yet respectful about the situation that the constitutionality aspect can easily [00:13:00] be addressed because people are in these different covered populations and they do go use other services when they have access to that support and that it is real people that are being hurt by not having access to these services. And it's everybody, right? It's urban,

Christopher Mitchell (13:19):
Rural, tribal. This is a part that, I mean, I just want to say, and I feel like you soft pedal this a little bit. Everyone is hurt in a world's in which we are not helping people take [00:13:30] advantage of this. We then have a less efficient government. This is something that the President and people who have surrounded him have insisted as a priority for them. However, the government cannot begin transitioning to all online services until we have everyone able to use devices and on the Internet.

Angela Siefer (13:48):
We also have a less competitive country. We have less competitive communities, states and a whole country if we have folks who don't have the digital skills. You have to have digital skills to compete [00:14:00] as an individual for jobs and as a country to compete for those jobs in those industries.

Christopher Mitchell (14:07):
I'd just like to go back to electrification. Bringing electricity to every last dairy farm in Wisconsin benefited everyone in America. We all get to make fun of the dumb cheese heads that they put on. But the point is that it's not just for the benefit of people who are connect. This is not charity. This is investment in our future that's in a more protective [00:14:30] economy.

Angela Siefer (14:31):
It is a hundred percent an investment, and it is investments I think in so many different levels. It's that individual, it's that community, it's that state, and it's the whole country.

Amy Huffman (14:42):
It also enables consumers to be more engaged in the digital economy. So great example. I helped my grandmother buy something on Amazon this week. [00:15:00] She has the Amazon app, but she couldn't quite figure it out. So I went over and helped her do that. If she had not been able to do that, I am not sure she would've ever made the purchase at all. It's not like that money's then going somewhere else. It's not going anywhere. And so by supporting folks in not only learning those basic skills of how to purchase things [00:15:30] online, how to engage with the government online and making the government more efficient, there's also the reality that technology is getting more and more advanced, more and more rapidly. And so if you have someone like my grandmother who can't purchase things online on her own will, I mean she's not in the workforce anymore, but someone younger than her then be able to compete in the [00:16:00] global job market using AI. I don't think so. So we're then dooming entire groups of people in our local economies to not be part of the global economy, to not be contributing to the local economy. And it's the economic impacts of that. I don't think we quite have an understanding of how big they are.

Christopher Mitchell (16:30):
[00:16:30] I don't know what the numbers are for Medicare offhand, but, so I'm going to conflate Medicare and Medicaid briefly. In doing some research on Telemental health services, I learned that people who are on Medicare who are depressed, I believe have twice the expenditure rate. They have more medical problems that require more interventions that are more costly. I know that there's 70 million people on [00:17:00] Medicaid. I think at this point, and surely the majority of the people who would get training from the Digital Equity Act are people who are on Medicare and Medicaid. These are the kind of target populations that are low income that are on those kinds of programs. And so we are committing ourselves to tens of millions, hundreds of millions. And I would say that's over the short term, billions of dollars over years of additional costs because of people not being able to take [00:17:30] advantage of telehealth services because of the extra interventions that are required and things like that. That's just one set of programs in which we are going to be now spending more if we see the DEA rolled back or canceled in some way.

Angela Siefer (17:46):
And it's not even just the telehealth services for those who are depressed or struggling with mental health. It's that connection to family and loved ones. How many of us think, I mean all the listeners, think about how [00:18:00] often you reach out to someone to have that connection with someone. And then if you don't have the Internet connection itself, or you don't have the skills to be able to do it, here's a good one. The grandkids aren't on Facebook anymore, and that's the only social media app. So then how do you talk to the grandkids? So needing to know how, okay, do they want you to text them? Do they want you to use another, whatever the app is that they will respond to, that's [00:18:30] the one that the grandparents want to use because they want that child to interact with them and that raises their

Christopher Mitchell (18:35):
Spirits. Yes. Thank you. In my head, I explained that, but I skipped over it. So now let's talk just briefly about what we might expect. The Digital Equity Act has multiple components. We are waiting on the NTIA within the Department of Commerce to make some decisions regarding the competitive grant program for which a lot of [00:19:00] organizations have put in funds. There were four awards that were obligated, one of which is to you Angela, to the organization, National Digital Inclusion Alliance. There are many that were announced that seem to be in limbo. So just tell me briefly what's going on with the competitive and then we'll go over to the capacity.

Angela Siefer (19:22):
So we really don't know anything other than the social media post from President Trump. So I suspect [00:19:30] folks over at NTIA are figuring out what they're going to do with this statement. There's four organizations that have a contract, they're obligated. We have a piece of paper that says that we have a contract, but only one of those four has full access to their funding. Two of them have partial access to the funding. NDIA has zero access to our funding. The way that these were set up is that you needed to provide [00:20:00] some information that they requested. We've provided all the information. We've been assured, we provided all the information. We did. So over a month ago, I think over six weeks ago, and nothing had happened, we were told that the program was under review is what we were told. And NTIA doesn't even have an administrator yet. She has not been confirmed in order to go sit in her seat and do her job. So they are [00:20:30] going to have to figure out what to do without somebody who's actually in charge to figure it out. I would not want to be sitting over there right now.

Christopher Mitchell (20:40):
And so that's interesting in part because that money is still within the federal government. Amy, you were going to share more information. The competitive grants are still, that's within their power to transfer it out.

Amy Huffman (20:53):
Yeah, yeah, that's right. So just to give a kind of lay of the land, [00:21:00] as you said, Chris, there's 65 projects that were recommended for award in January of this year out of the competitive grants that was roughly 619 million or so. And so there was still a little over 300 million to give out from that tranche or to be recommended, right?

Christopher Mitchell (21:24):
Those would be proposals that had not been acted on. So would still [00:21:30] the Trump administration would be able to decide which of the proposals to move forward.

Amy Huffman (21:35):
That's right. Yeah. So all of that, that's a billion dollars is in limbo and has been really since January on the other side for the states and territories, 56 states and territories, including District of Columbia, create a digital equity or digital opportunity or digital access plans in the last few years. And then [00:22:00] as of December 2024, their proposed implementation plans were all approved to move forward with funds to go then implement those plans. And so they've been operating under the assumption that they have funding to do the projects that they've been promised. They've promised the people in their states to do. They've been operating on the assumption that the grant programs that they have up and running and are live right now that people [00:22:30] are applying to that they'll be able to fulfill those contracts and be able to pay those people with funding from the Digital Equity Act. And not to get too wonky, but there's also future tranches of funds that haven't come out yet either. So there's future tranches of funds that were supposed to come out this year and next year that very well could have been or could still be [00:23:00] aligned with administrative goals like advancing AI and things like that.

Angela Siefer (23:09):
Can I just jump in real quick that this is possible that someone could convince Trump that this was not something he might want to quietly not move forward with because the Digital Equity Act could be adjusted to meet his administration's priorities? That could happen.

Christopher Mitchell (23:30):
[00:23:30] And again, I would just like to say my first thought immediately was of many veterans who they come home, and I've certainly met veterans who found a relatively easy transition back. Maybe I shouldn't speak for them, but it seemed like they transitioned well into having a job and moving on. Others did not pick up skills perhaps that were as relevant for the modern workforce and prioritizing them to get some level of training to [00:24:00] make sure that we can take advantage of their skills and things like that. Seems like it should be a high priority. As well as, I mean, I've said a lot about economic productivity. I sometimes have a small beating heart, and I'll say that also for older adults, just making sure they can enjoy the fact they've already given their time to the country, they've done their work, they've served, and now they should have an opportunity to take advantage of modern technology. And much like [00:24:30] we put federal dollars into training people on how to use electricity, how to use toasters, what refrigerators would do, what automated laundry services would do and things like that. It was valuable to get people to use those things. And then it created the economic benefits as well. This is not the first time we're trying something like this.

Angela Siefer (24:52):
I think that next obvious step is AI. NDIA has multiple pilot projects going on right now where we are helping [00:25:00] our affiliates integrate AI literacy into digital skills literacy. You have to know what it is when it shows up in front of you because it's already showing up in front of you and folks do not know it's showing up in front of them. So they need to know when it's happening, know when to trust some results. If just I used it for some ideas for my nephew's Easter egg got, that's a fine use. If it leads me astray, I'll just adjust. Should you look up health information? No, you shouldn't. And we should [00:25:30] really make,

Christopher Mitchell (25:31):
If you're preparing a brief for a court, you should not

Angela Siefer (25:36):
Use it for that. But these are the kinds of things, this is AI literacy, these are the kinds of things we need folks to know because you may not think you're using AI, but you are because it's already integrated in a lot of the tools that we all use day to day.

Christopher Mitchell (25:49):
Hey, have you thought that your rebrand could be really easy with ND AI?

Angela Siefer (25:56):
I actually had not considered that. We will take [00:26:00] that under advisement to the board of directors. Chris,

Christopher Mitchell (26:02):
I can see you've been presented with dumb ideas in the past and you know how to react. So I mean, at this point, I think it's fair to say that there's been an announcement and we're seeking more clarity and not really sure what to expect. We don't even know when to expect it. Ariel Roth, I think we would expect her to be confirmed. We don't know what the schedule is and she is on maternity [00:26:30] leave or family leave, I guess was the proper term for it. And so there's a lot of unknowns there. And so I dunno mean, we just heard that bead also under NTIA and I think being directly adjusted by Secretary Lutnick is not expected to make decisions until June and likely July as people say possibly July and government speak, that almost means always not before July.

Angela Siefer (26:59):
Yes, exactly.

Christopher Mitchell (27:00):
[00:27:00] So I guess for people who are listening, we're releasing this right away to make sure that people can get a sense of what's going on. But I feel like it would not surprise me if at the end of Net Inclusion, we don't have any more. We haven't heard a single other thing from the government on this. That's entirely possible.

Angela Siefer (27:20):
That is very likely actually. So Net Inclusion is in a couple of weeks, and we are really taking the attitude [00:27:30] that we need to help the community to beat a community and support each other and help figure out other next steps. If the funding doesn't come, then let's do these other great things, and also to all of us to be elevating the work that digital inclusion does and provides to the communities. Because still lots of folks who don't understand. And so the more that understanding is out there, the more we can help save the program. So we are doing a lot of encouraging [00:28:00] the NDIA's affiliates to tell their stories and do so when they're in their own communities and then elevate each other's stories because we do need more folks to understand what this work is so that when they hear it and they hear things like the statement that President Trump put out, they'll think, should that be right? Is that what really we should really be doing as a country?

Christopher Mitchell (28:23):
Amy, any last thoughts?

Amy Huffman (28:28):
Yeah, I mean, [00:28:30] the one thing that we didn't really touch on is Congress wrote this law and passed it and also has the power of the purse. So it's really not within the President's authority. And I'm not a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar, but I do understand a little bit, and it's not within his authority to retract a program that is law. So Congress needs [00:29:00] to step up here and it's a program and a set of programs that are they saw worthy to design and implement in the first place. And so important enough that they include it in an infrastructure act that is intended to remake our modern infrastructure and we need Congress to step forward and [00:29:30] remind the President of why they wrote it in the first place.

Christopher Mitchell (29:35):
Yes, I think that's a very good point. I'm sorry that we didn't make it earlier in the show because in the discussion about the normal order of business, we could have also included that. I don't know. Some of us have learned a lot more about the Nixon administration and the fact that the President is not at liberty to refuse to spend dollars that Congress has allocated, or at least I should say, that there's a lot more complication than would be suggested [00:30:00] that the President can go to the press and say, Hey, we're not doing this thing. There are procedures. And I mean, the problem is that this could be lost amid a lot of other controversial issues. Amy, I agree with you. I implore Congress to get us back to the system that was designed in which we have branches that check each other and our rivalries and things like that. I think that we would all [00:30:30] be better off. Angela, any last comments? I thank

Angela Siefer (30:35):
You, Chris. This is how we're all going to make it through days when we thought we'd be working on sustainability and now we're working on survival.

Christopher Mitchell (30:47):
Thank you. I do have to say that's one of the frustrating things is that none of us want to be here being like, oh, I have to figure out how the Constitution works and how legal authority works and stuff. Like we want NDIA members to be not thinking, Hey, are [00:31:00] we going to be able to retain the people that we were bringing on or to bring on new people to do these trainings and to help move America into a digital economy? Instead, they're sitting there thinking, do I need to brush up on my resume? And it's such, it's what economists called Dead Weight Loss, I think. And it is just super unproductive and really frustrating. But I appreciate the role that you all are playing, and I think I hope that if people are listening to this and you are concerned, you understand the work [00:31:30] is really important and that we need you to keep doing it even in uncertain times, and we'll keep finding a way to get it done because marching into the future one way or another. So

Angela Siefer (31:42):
That's absolutely right.

Christopher Mitchell (31:42):
We got to do the best we can. Thank you both for coming on. Thanks,

Amy Huffman (31:46):
Chris. Thank you, Chris.

Ry Marcattilio (31:49):
We have transcripts for this, another podcasts available at muninetworks.org/broadbandbits. Email us @podcastmuninetworks.org with your ideas for the show. [00:32:00] Follow Chris on Twitter, his handles @CommunityNets, follow muninetworks.org. Stories on Twitter that handles @muninetworks. Subscribe to this and other podcasts from ILSR, including Building Local Power, Local Energy Rules, and the Composting for Community Podcast. You can access them anywhere you get your podcasts. You can catch the latest important research from all of our initiatives if you subscribe to our monthly newsletter @ilsr.org. While you're there, please take [00:32:30] a moment to donate your support in any amount. Keeps us going. Thank you to Arnie Hughes for the song Warm Duck Shuffle, licensed through Creative comments. This was the Community Broadband Bits podcast. Thanks for listening.