SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Jen Howard, Free Press, (202) 265-1490 x22 or (703) 517-627
Free Press is calling on Congress to attach public service conditions and accountability to the broadband stimulus funds allocated in the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009," previewed today in a release from the House Appropriations Committee.
According to the release, the House bill would allocate $6 billion in "wireless and broadband grants" toward "services in underserved areas to strengthen the economy and provide business and job opportunities in every section of America with benefits to e-commerce, education, and healthcare. For every dollar invested in broadband the economy sees a ten-fold return on that investment."
Read the release: https://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/PressSummary01-15-09.pdf
In letters sent to House Appropriations Chair David Obey (D-Wisc.) and Senate Appropriations Chair Daniel K. Inouye (D-Ill.), Free Press voiced support for broadband stimulus and urged legislators to target funding toward future-proof networks that are fast, open and affordable.
"While $6 billion is not as much as we had hoped for, it is a substantial investment that represents an important public commitment to broadband," said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press. "This money must be tied to a single agency that can uphold clear principles of public service and enforce concrete administrative accountability."
Full text of the letter is included below:
We write to offer our strong support for the commitment shown by congressional leaders and President-elect Barack Obama to consider high-speed Internet -- our nation's broadband networks -- as a focal point for the economic recovery package. Our telecommunications networks are the nervous system of our economy, catalysts of social mobility, and connection points to knowledge, information and political participation.
We are pleased to see the recent report that as much as $6 billion is allocated in the draft bill for broadband. This represents a critical component of what could be a multifaceted approach to economic stimulus through technology. We urge that these dollars be tied to clear public service principles and concrete administrative accountability. Broadband as economic recovery should be "build-out," not "bail-out."
We must view our communications infrastructure as a public good. This is not a moment to push dollars to large corporations in weakly competitive markets without a firm hand of oversight and an eye to the public interest. Too often in our recent past, government has given money to network owners to expand access and build next-generation connectivity, only to find promises broken and benefits lost. This is a significant part of the reason why the US has dropped to 22nd place in the world in broadband adoption. But change is in the air -- and a telecommunications sector that has long been off track can be righted. Done properly, broadband policy in the economic recovery package is one part of the solution. Public investment can trigger private investment, create hundreds of thousands of jobs, stimulate competition, and deliver to American consumers the permanent economic asset of a world-class communications network.
To do this right will require bold leadership. We ask that you organize broadband policy around these basic principles of public service:
Universality -- Bring networks to unserved and underserved areas.
Openness -- Prohibit discrimination against any lawful content on the networks and empower consumers with freedom of choice among Internet services.
Affordability -- Keep new networks at reasonably comparable prices with existing residential service.
Innovation -- Promote competition among network providers and build future-proof networks that address our perennial lag behind our global competitors.
Accountability -- Ensure that tax dollars spent on broadband networks achieve results, building metrics and benchmarks to guarantee transparency and a return on investment.
We want to especially emphasize a few key points.
First, tax dollars should not be used to fund closed, proprietary networks that shut out content providers, control consumer behavior, and encourage anticompetitive activity. That outcome would be anathema to the goal of building infrastructure of maximum utility to all of the American economy and society. There are several paths that Congress can take to protect consumers. These networks could be made open to all providers on a wholesale basis to promote competition. They could come with mandatory requirements to ensure nondiscrimination between network owners, content providers, and consumers. Or Congress could set policy to reaffirm and expand existing law to protect the innovation engine of the open Internet -- passing to the independent regulatory agencies the task of specifying the rules of the road. We must be clear that it is the open market of unfettered innovation, collaborative production, and consumer curiosity that has driven the success of network technologies to date. All of the economic multipliers that come with infrastructure investment depend on these network effects.
Second, grant monies should flow through a single administrative agency to ensure that accountability is clear and strict. Ideally, this should be an agency with the expertise to account for the impact of broadband stimulus on other telecommunications policy, especially the rate-payer supported Universal Service Fund.
Finally, we should be clear that stimulus policy and telecommunications policy overlap at a central conclusion -- speed equals jobs. Limited stimulus funds should be allocated to capital investment plans that would not have occurred otherwise. Further, these dollars should support the construction of new physical network infrastructure wherever possible, as these are the most job-intensive projects. This focus will naturally privilege faster networks which in turn have their own multiplier effect on the economy as consumers and business adopt these services. This program should be available and made attractive to all network owners, including municipalities, non-profits, and other non-incumbent operators.
We look forward to working with Congress, the new administration, and the broad community of public stakeholders to achieve the best possible outcome -- Internet for everyone.
View the letter to the House Appropriations Committee: https://www.freepress.net/files/Stimulus_letter_House_MCR.pdf
View the letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee: https://www.freepress.net/files/Stimulus_letter_Senate_MCR.pdf
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490"Illinois will not let the Trump administration continue on their authoritarian march without resisting," vowed Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker.
Defying objections from state and local leaders, Texas Army National Guard troops sent on orders from President Donald Trump began arriving in Chicagoland Tuesday, sparking widespread outrage and vows to resist.
Hundreds of federalized troops arrived at a military facility in suburban Joliet, Block Club Chicago reported. The Trump administration also announced plans over the weekend to federalize the Illinois National Guard and call up hundreds more troops for a mission to ostensibly support the president's anti-immigrant crackdown.
Officials including US Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson—all Democrats—have condemned the deployment.
"No officials from the federal government called me directly to discuss or coordinate,” Pritzker said in a statement ahead of the deployment. “We must now start calling this what it is: Trump’s invasion. It started with federal agents, it will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops.”
President Trump and Governor Abbott have illegally sent the Texas National Guard into the sovereign state of Illinois over the objections of Governor Pritzker.This is a frightening and unconstitutional escalation.
— Senator Dick Durbin (@durbin.senate.gov) October 7, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Johnson—who on Monday signed an executive order establishing “ICE-free zones,” barring US Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel from using city-owned facilities—addressed the deployment during a Tuesday press conference.
"As far as what we are hearing, the National Guard—first of all, it’s illegal, unconstitutional, it’s dangerous, it’s wrong," the progressive leader of the nation's third-largest city told reporters. "This is not about deportation. This is not about safety for this president."
Illinois and the city of Chicago on Monday filed a pair of lawsuits seeking to block Trump's invasion. US District Judge April Perry subsequently refused to block the deployment, instead ordering the US Department of Justice to respond to the lawsuit within 48 hours. Perry set a Thursday hearing on the matter before she issues a ruling on the plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order to block the deployment.
Trump's Illinois deployment followed his federal invasion of cities including Los Angeles, California; Washington, DC; and Portland, Oregon. Judges have ruled that the LA and Portland deployments are illegal.
On Monday, Trump said he was open to invoking the Insurrection Act to put down future civil unrest in US cities, drawing sharp condemnation from legal experts and other critics, some of whom accused the president of trying to foment disorder he could cite to justify even more authoritarianism.
Officials and activists in Illinois vowed to continue resisting Trump's actions.
"Illinois will not let the Trump administration continue on their authoritarian march without resisting," Pritzker said Tuesday. "We will use every lever at our disposal to stop this power grab because military troops should not be used against American communities."
"Speaker Johnson: Stop delaying her swearing in. Stop hiding the Epstein files. And start doing your job," said Sen. Ed Markey.
Since Democrat Adelita Grijalva won an Arizona special election for her late father's seat in the US House of Representatives two weeks ago, Speaker Mike Johnson has faced mounting accusations that he has intentionally delayed swearing her in—and on Tuesday, the Louisiana Republican attempted to quash those allegations.
Critics have highlighted that GOP Congressman Jimmy Patronis and Randy Fine, both of Florida, were sworn in during a pro forma session right after winning special elections in April, and suggested that the delay for Grijalva stems from her support for a forcing a vote on a measure requiring the US Department of Justice to release its files on deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who was friends with Republican President Donald Trump.
Johnson refused Democrats' requests to swear in Grijalva during a pro forma session early last week. She told The Hill at the time: "There's no reason why I couldn't have been sworn in, and it's very problematic, because we're facing a government shutdown. We're going to have constituents who have questions, and there is nobody there to answer questions."
On Tuesday, Johnson took questions from the press alongside other congressional leaders amid the government shutdown that began last Wednesday. CNN's Manu Raju noted the discrepancy between Johnson's treatment of the Republican congressman and Grijalva, as well as arguments that the speaker has pushed off swearing her in because she would sign the discharge petition for the Epstein files legislation.
"No, it has nothing to do with that at all," Johnson claimed. "We will swear her in when everybody gets back. It's a ceremonial duty."
He then added, "Look, we'll schedule it, I guess, as soon as she wants."
However, according to Raju, Johnson then said that he would swear in Grijalva "as soon as the House returns to session" and when Senate Majority Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Arizona's two Democratic senators, Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, "decide to open up the government."
Republicans want to stick with their government spending plans, while Democrats are fighting to reverse the Medicaid cuts in the GOP's July budget package and extend expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies, warning that absent urgent action by Congress, the health insurance of millions is at risk.
Earlier Tuesday, Johnson had walked away from a similar question about Grijalva, sparking a fresh wave of criticism, including from multiple Democrats in Congress.
"Adelita Grijalva is the duly elected representative for Arizona’s 7th congressional district," Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said on social media. "Speaker Johnson: Stop delaying her swearing in. Stop hiding the Epstein files. And start doing your job."
Responding to Johnson's new remarks, the Democratic National Committee's Kendall Witmer said in a Tuesday statement that "after countless excuses and delays, Mike Johnson finally committed to swearing in Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva 'as soon as she wants'—so do it, Speaker Johnson."
"The American people are done with the stalling, delaying, and lying that has come out of Trump's White House and his Republican loyalists in Congress as they try to cover up the truth about Jeffrey Epstein's heinous crimes," Witmer added. "The public deserves answers—not excuses. Swear her in. Release the files."
"This blocking attitude is at the heart of the budget crisis and also, as a result, of the current political crisis," said Gabriel Zucman after another French prime minister resigned.
On the heels of France losing yet another prime minister, Politico on Tuesday published an interview in which world-renowned French economist Gabriel Zucman argued that the recently departed leaders should have supported his proposed wealth tax.
Zucman, who leads the EU Tax Observatory and teaches at French and US universities, has advocated for imposing a wealth tax of at least 2% for the ultrarich in France and around the world. However, Sébastien Lecornu, who resigned as prime minister on Monday, after less than a month in office, did not embrace that approach, the economist noted.
Former Prime Minister François Bayrou also didn't support the "Zucman tax." He was in the post when the French National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, in February—and when the Senate ultimately rejected the policy in June. He resigned in early September, after losing a no-confidence vote.
Before both of them, Michel Barnier was prime minister. He resigned last December, also after losing a no-confidence vote. He, too, didn't embrace the tax policy, despite polling that shows, as Zucman put it, "there is a very strong demand among the population for greater tax fairness and better taxation of the ultrarich."
"The executive has so far remained completely deaf to both parliamentary work and popular democratic demands," Zucman told Politico's Giorgio Leali. "They didn't try to have a real dialogue with the opposition on this."
"The very wealthy individuals affected by this measure, and the media outlets they own, have spoken out very vehemently on the subject in an attempt to discourage the government from engaging in any form of reflection or discussion," he added.
On social media, Leali shared a quote from Zucman tying the former prime ministers' attitudes on the tax proposal and broader budget fight to the country's current political crisis—in which "increasingly isolated" President Emmanuel Macron faces pressure from across France's political spectrum to hold a snap parliamentary election or resign.
As Reuters reported Tuesday, "Resignation calls, long confined to the fringes, have entered the mainstream during one of the worst political crises since the 1958 creation of the Fifth Republic, France's current system of government."
Even Édouard Philippe—who, as France 24 noted, was "Macron's longest-serving prime minister from 2017 to 2020"—is urging him to step down, saying that the president must help France "emerge in an orderly and dignified manner from a political crisis that is harming the country."
After the anti-austerity "Block Everything" protests across France on September 10, Mathilde Panot of the leftist party La France Insoumise (LFI) announced that 100 members of Parliament endorsed a motion to impeach Macron.
LFI founder Jean-Luc Mélenchon said Monday that "following the resignation of Sébastien Lecornu, we call for the immediate consideration of the motion tabled by 104 MPs for the impeachment of Emmanuel Macron."
"Emmanuel Macron is responsible for the political chaos," he said, calling out "those in power" for failing to respond to not only the demonstrations on September 10 but also the union mobilizations on September 18 and October 2.
"The president is rejected by public opinion, which desires his departure, and he has lost the support of ALL the parties in his political coalition," Mélenchon added Tuesday. "Why does he remain? A return to coherence for the country requires his departure and a return to the voice of the people."