FCC commissioner wants to cut funding for broadband and boost Starlink

In the United States, on May 12, 2025, FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington announced plans for a significant overhaul of the Federal Communications Commission's operational structure. His proposals center around reducing funds allocated for the Universal Service Fund, which currently supports broadband deployment and access across the country. Simington aims to shift this funding directly to Elon Musk's Starlink satellite internet service, arguing that the existing program has become outdated and inefficient. Simington's vision for reform is outlined in an op-ed he co-wrote in the Daily Caller, where he expressed that the FCC is burdened by legacy systems that waste resources at consumers’ and taxpayers’ expense. He emphasized that the review processes for license applications at the FCC should be modernized—with a shift towards automation—that would expedite approvals immensely. This reform is positioned as an essential step towards promoting faster and more innovative service in a rapidly evolving technological landscape. The current composition of the FCC includes two Republicans and two Democrats; thus, any significant regulatory changes face challenges without a Republican majority. But the landscape is changing, as Democratic Commissioner Geoffrey Starks is planning to leave his position this spring, potentially allowing for new Republican appointments that could facilitate Simington's proposed reforms. These changes have sparked a polarizing debate among stakeholders in the telecommunications industry, with some voicing concerns over the implications for fiber networks—an infrastructure that generally provides superior service compared to satellite options like Starlink. Simington's proposals come at a time when there is growing discourse about the effectiveness and efficiency of government programs and the necessity for modernization within federal agencies. As these recommendations move forward, the FCC’s operational dynamics and the implications for consumers—especially those in underserved areas—remain crucial topics of discussion. While some see these changes as proactive and necessary, others fear that they could undermine efforts to ensure everyone has access to reliable internet service. Moreover, the possibility of diverting funds from well-established broadband systems to a newer technology raises questions about long-term service quality and availability for end-users.