Broadband Internet for Small Ports Act
Sponsored By: Representative Plaskett, Stacey E. [D-VI-At Large]
In Committee
Summary
This bill would refocus federal rural broadband programs to speed deployments and target rural ports and nearby communities. It reshapes who qualifies for funding and how projects are prioritized.
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
6 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 4 mixed.
Higher grant share for rural builds
If enacted, grants would normally cover up to 50% of project development costs. The Secretary could raise that share up to 75% if the project serves certain rural households and rural communities defined in the program. This would lower the applicant's required match on eligible projects.
Priority for rural ports and farms
If enacted, projects that add broadband in rural ports would get equal priority in selection. The bill would define “port” broadly to include ports on navigable waters, shore-side inland facilities that move goods, and ports formed under state or territory law. Projects that quickly deploy broadband on cropland or ranchland for precision farming would also get added priority. If your project serves a rural port or farm land, your odds to win funding would improve.
Changed cost-sharing thresholds for applicants
If enacted, two numbers used in program cost-sharing rules would change. One threshold would change from 50 to 90, and another would change from 3 to 2. Depending on how these numbers apply to your project, your required cost share or eligibility could go up or down.
Faster decisions and early fund commitments
If enacted, the Secretary would give applicants timely feedback and funding decisions. The Secretary could obligate funds before environmental or historic reviews finish, but could not pay out until the reviews are done. This could speed commitments while keeping review protections.
Stronger checks on unserved areas and service
If enacted, for top-priority applications the Secretary would confirm each listed unserved rural community by checking FCC and NTIA data, other sources, and doing site tests. The list would be reviewed at least every 2 years by notice in the Federal Register. The Secretary would also coordinate with the FCC so funded service meets or exceeds the universal service high-cost standard.
New reporting and oversight for projects
If enacted, recipients would have to submit precise location data for new or upgraded service within 30 days after each milestone or project completion. At least 1% of program funds would be set aside for oversight and accountability. These rules would apply only to funded projects.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Plaskett, Stacey E. [D-VI-At Large]
VI • D
Cosponsors
Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]
AL • R
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov