When you think about who is going to be hit the hardest by pollution, whether it’s conventional air water and soil pollution or climate change, it is very often low-income communities and communities of color. The undercutting of these kinds of protections is going to have a disproportionate impact on these very same communities.
Federal Communications Commission
It should be noted at this point that the views expressed here are not shared uniformly by all conservatives. There are some, including contributors to this chapter, who do not think that the FCC or Congress should act in a way that regulates the content-moderation decisions of private platforms. One of the main arguments that this group offers is that doing so would intrude— unlawfully in their view—on the First Amendment rights of corporations to exclude content from their private platforms.
• Require that Big Tech begin to contribute a fair share. Big Tech has avoided accountability in several additional ways as well. One of them concerns the FCC’s roughly $9 billion Universal Service Fund. This initiative provides the support necessary to subsidize the agency’s affordable Internet and rural connectivity programs. The FCC obtains this funding through a line-item charge that carriers add to consumers’ monthly bills for traditional telecommunications service.
While Big Tech derives tremendous value from the federal government’s universal service investments—using those federally supported networks to deliver their products and realize significant profits—these large corporations have avoided paying a fair share into the program. On top of that, the FCC’s current funding mechanism has been on an unsustainable path.” By requiring traditional telephone customers to contribute to a fund that is being used increasingly to support broadband networks, the FCC’s current approach is the regulatory equivalent of taxing horseshoes to pay for highways. To put the FCC’s universal service program on a stable footing, Congress should require Big Tech companies to start contributing an appropriate amount.
Conservatives are not unanimous in agreeing that the FCC should expand the USF contribution base. Instead, some argue that Congress should revisit the program’s entire funding structure and determine whether to continue subsidizing the provision of service. Future funding decisions, the argument goes, should be made by Congress through the normal appropriation process through which the USF program can compete for funding with other national initiatives. These decisions should be made with an eye to right-sizing
the federal government’s existing broadband initiatives in light of both technological advances and the recent influx of billions of dollars in new appropriations that can be used to support efforts to end the digital divide.
Protecting America’s National Security. During the Trump Administration, the FCC ushered in a new and appropriately strong approach to the national
Take Action
Project 2025 - Top Issues
Read Project 2025 on top issues:
Medicare, education, health care, climate change, veterans, energy, birth control, Social Security, overtime, agriculture, mifepristone, Israel, small business, school lunches, disabilities, Supreme Court, abortion, the death penalty, porn, immigration
Dive Deeper
Read the Project 2025 Comics
Comics explaining Project 2025 (https://stopproject2025comic.org/):
"Project 2025 is a detailed plan to shut you up, and shut you out.
Don’t let it do either.
Read on, then vote."
Comics explain Project 2025 by topic: Children. Health care. Voting. Taxes. Climate. Education. And more.
Read Project 2025 in an open, online discussion
Read and discuss Project 2025 - the whole thing
Joyce Vance Columns on Project 2025
Law professor and NBC Legal Analyst Joyce Vance covers Project 2025