July, 19 2021, 08:25am EDT

New Report: How Lobbying and Political Influence By Broadband Gatekeepers Has Shaped The Digital Divide
A new report from Common Cause in partnership with the Communications Workers of America, "
WASHINGTON
A new report from Common Cause in partnership with the Communications Workers of America, "Broadband Gatekeepers: How ISP Lobbying and Political Influence Shapes the Digital Divide," examines lobbying and political spending by the largest ISPs and their trade associations and how these activities have shaped the digital divide.
Broadband connectivity has never been more important to a functioning 21st-century democracy than it is today, as the nation continues to face an unprecedented emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, millions of households remain on the wrong side of the digital divide as a result of market failure. The pandemic has painfully exposed the disparities in connectivity too many Americans face today, particularly for marginalized communities--where students have had to turn to parking lot Wi-Fi to do schoolwork, and households have been left behind in the vaccination sign-up process, which has moved primarily to online formats.
The report presents lobbying and campaign finance data compiled by OpenSecrets.org for the 15 biggest, most influential ISPs and related trade associations and finds these corporations spent more than $234 million on lobbying and federal elections during the 116th Congress--an average of more than $320,000 a day. This spending has stymied progress on issues like network resiliency, increased broadband speeds, and price transparency that are critical to closing the digital divide.
"For years, Congressional efforts to pass legislation needed to address the nation's long-standing disparities in connectivity have been stopped dead in their tracks in part because of aggressive industry lobbying and the oversized political influence of the largest ISPs," said Yosef Getachew, Common Cause Media and Democracy Program Director. "Now more than ever, policymakers must pass reforms that not only close the digital divide but also hold ISPs accountable for providing high-speed, reliable, and affordable broadband."
"The powerful ISP lobby will seemingly spend whatever it takes to keep politicians beholden to them and maintain a status quo that leaves too many Americans on the wrong side of the digital divide," said Beth Rotman, Common Cause Money in Politics & Ethics Program Director. "The Senate needs to pass the For the People Act, a legislative package that includes important lobbying and campaign finance reforms to check the power of wealthy special interests."
"Our political system is rigged in favor of hedge funds and wealthy shareholders who demand short-term profits over the lasting health of our economy. To satisfy Wall Street, ISPs and trade associations are spending millions fighting legislation that would help close the digital divide," said CWA Senior Director for Government Affairs Shane Larson. "The impact this has on low-income communities and rural residents is devastating. Telecom companies are limiting deployment of fiber optic broadband to wealthier neighborhoods and monopoly cable is overcharging for subpar service. It's time broadband workers and customers get some accountability. That has to come from Congress and the FCC."
The report is broken down into four main sections:
- "Industry's Influence On Congress Has Shaped The Digital Divide," which explains the types of activities industry lobbyists are engaged in, the talking points used, and how they have contributed to the current state of the digital divide.
- "Background On Laws Regarding Special Interest Money In Politics," which goes into detail about the relevant rules on lobbying disclosure
- "Internet Service Provider Money In Politics During The 116th Congress," which outlines how much money ISPs and their trade associations spent to influence broadband-related legislation
- "A Closer Look At Specific Broadband Legislation," which analyzes ISP lobbying expenditures to influence broadband-related legislation introduced in the 116th Congress. Each of the bills examined seeks to address one or more of the existing disparities in broadband connectivity we face today.
The report concludes with a series of recommendations Common Cause is working to advance to help close the digital divide and reduce the undue influence of big special interest money in politics:
- Passage of the Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act, which takes significant steps to address all aspects of the digital divide, including broadband access, affordability, and digital equity.
- Support for the FCC's Lifeline program through Universal Service Fund reform and permanent funding from Congress for digital inclusion activities, such as digital literacy training and access to connected devices that help households successfully adopt broadband.
- Restore Net Neutrality and the FCC's authority over broadband.
- Pass the For the People Act to adopt important lobbying reforms, including expansion of the scope of reportable lobbying to include paid counseling services in support of lobbying contacts (e.g., strategy consulting) and a reduction in the threshold percentage of time spent lobbying for a client that triggers disclosure from 20% to 10%.
- Amendment of the Lobbying Disclosure Act to more explicitly require quarterly lobbying reports to disclose specific bills lobbied on and require lobbyists to disclose the specific congressional offices and committees contacted.
- Amend federal law to require lobbyists and their clients who otherwise meet the lobbying registration and reporting thresholds to disclose grassroots lobbying expenditures.
The report was co-authored by Yosef Getachew, Jonathan Walter, Beth Rotman, and Paul S. Ryan.
To read the "Broadband Gatekeepers: How ISP Lobbying and Political Influence Shapes the Digital Divide" report, click here.
To view this release online, click here.
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200LATEST NEWS
Three Years After Roe Reversal, Abortion Rights Defenders Say Dobbs Legitimized Extremism
"These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs," warned the Senate's top Democrat.
Jun 24, 2025
Reproductive freedom advocates on Tuesday marked the third anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court reversingRoe v. Wade by calling out Republican decision-makers—including President Donald Trump—for the harmful impacts of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.
"Three years after the Supreme Court's devastating Dobbs decision stripped away constitutional protections for reproductive freedom, we face not only the predicted economic catastrophe but a terrifying escalation of political violence targeting women's rights advocates," said Equal Rights Advocates executive director Noreen Farrell, pointing to the recent assassination of former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (DFL-61) and attempted murder of state Sen. John Hoffman (DFL-34).
"Equal Rights Advocates warned that Dobbs would unleash more than legal restrictions—it would legitimize extremism. Now we see the tragic fulfillment of that prediction," Farrell continued. "This administration's policies represent calculated economic warfare against women, particularly low-income women and women of color. The case of Adriana Smith last week illustrates the extreme consequences of the Dobbs decision—a pregnant Black woman denied medical care, becoming a brain-dead incubator for a fetus against her medical directive and her family's wishes."
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized."
The Georgia law doctors at Emory University Hospital cited to keep Smith on life support—allegedly without the input or consent of her family—until her fetus could be delivered is one of various anti-choice state laws that took effect after Dobbs.
"For the last three years, we have witnessed firsthand what happens when politicians try to control the rights of people to practice basic bodily autonomy—with dire results," said Dr. Jamila Perritt, an OB-GYN and abortion provider who serves as president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health, in a Tuesday statement.
"We have seen countless people forced to leave their communities to get basic healthcare, forced to remain pregnant when they wouldn't have otherwise, criminalized for experiencing pregnancy loss, and ultimately, we have seen people dying after being turned away when seeking emergency abortion care," Perritt detailed.
The Guttmacher Institute on Tuesday released new data about the 155,000 abortion patients who traveled out of state to obtain care last year. The group said that "similar to 2023, Illinois remained a critical access point in 2024, with 35,470 patients traveling from across the South and Midwest to obtain abortion care in the state."
Guttmacher Institute data scientist and study lead Isaac Maddow-Zimet noted that "while these findings show us where and how far patients are traveling, they are not able to capture the numerous financial, logistical, social, and emotional obstacles people face. In addition to the travel costs, driving or flying across state lines often requires taking time off work, navigating complex logistics and arranging childcare, not to mention paying for the abortion itself."
As states continue to pass restrictions post-Dobbs, patients' options are dwindling. For example, Guttmacher director of state policy Candace Gibson explained that "Florida had been an important access point for abortion in the Southeast, so when the state's six-week ban went into effect in May 2024, it was not just Floridians who were impacted, but also the thousands of out-of-state patients who would have traveled there for care."
While running to retake the White House last year, Republican President Donald Trump—who appointed three of the Supreme Court's six right-wing justices during his first term—came out against a Florida ballot measure that would end his state's strict abortion ban and bragged about his role in reversing Roe but also tried to downplay the importance of reproductive rights to voters.
"It's been three years since people in the United States have lost their federal constitutional right to abortion; three years since President Trump's handpicked Supreme Court justices stripped Americans of this fundamental right to freedom," Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a Tuesday statement. "The consequences have been devastating, even lethal."
"We can't know all the names of the women who have died because of abortion bans, but we will never forget that people have endured injury, pain, and suffering because of the Dobbs decision," she declared. "We continue to fight President Trump and his backers' attacks on reproductive rights, including their effort to 'defund' Planned Parenthood in Congress and end abortion access for everyone, everywhere. Planned Parenthood Action Fund will never stop advocating for a country where all people have the power to control their own bodies, lives, and futures."
Reproductive Freedom for All president and CEO Mini Timmaraju was similarly determined on Tuesday, launching a campaign to mobilize against Trump and the GOP.
"In the 21 states with abortion bans and extreme restrictions, women continue to die, and along with their providers, are being threatened, targeted, and criminalized," Timmaraju said. "And while the Trump administration continues to gut our fundamental freedoms, we continue to fight against the GOP's attacks on Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, and essential reproductive care."
Congressional Democrats—who have minorities in both chambers—joined advocacy group leaders in using the Dobbs anniversary to direct anger at the president and Republican policymakers working to strip away reproductive freedom from people nationwide.
During a Tuesday press conference, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the high court's June 2022 ruling "will go down in history as one of the worst, most harmful, most regressive decisions in modern history" and stressed that "people are dying as a result of the Dobbs decision."
Noting that many patients have had to travel or wait for care, Schumer said that "this is abominable. We know that this is what Republicans want, a total ban on abortion. These anti-choice fanatics will stop at nothing. They don't think their work is finished even after such a horrible and wide-ranging decision as Dobbs. Reproductive freedom is under attack on all sides. Extremists are banning and restricting abortion, criminalizing providers, defunding care, and interfering with lifesaving medicines."
"These attacks are also devastating our economy. With fewer reproductive healthcare protections, fewer women are participating in the workforce. State-level restrictions on abortion access combined with the lack of federal protection cost the economy more than $133 billion nationally," he continued. "The 16 states with the most restrictive abortion policies were responsible for $64 billion in economic loss."
The Senate's top Democrat also called out his GOP colleagues for what he called "a Republican backdoor abortion ban done in the reconciliation bill," taking aim at "two nasty provisions to defund Planned Parenthood and eliminate coverage for comprehensive reproductive care" from the Affordable Care Act marketplace.
"I'm here to say that Democrats are going to fight like hell to strip these cruel provisions from the Republican bill, including in the Byrd bath, which will be occurring today or tomorrow," he pledged, referring to the Senate parliamentarian's review of the GOP megabill. "Just as we fought back against attacks on abortion before, we will fight these nasty provisions with every fiber in our being."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Whistleblower Says Top DOJ Official Pushed to Ignore Court Orders to Carry Out Deportations
Emil Bove "does not belong on the federal bench," said one Democratic lawmaker ahead of confirmation hearings on the Justice Department official's judicial nomination.
Jun 24, 2025
With the Senate scheduled to hold a confirmation hearing on federal judicial nominee Emil Bove on Wednesday, Democrats urged the Republican Party to consider an explosive whistleblower complaint as they weighed Bove's nomination—one that revealed allegations that he directed U.S. Department of Justice staffers to ignore court orders to carry out the Trump administration's mass deportation agenda.
The whistleblower complaint was filed Tuesday with federal lawmakers and the DOJ's inspector general by a veteran lawyer in the agency's Office of Immigration Litigation, Erez Reuveni, who was fired in April after expressing concerns in federal court that the administration had wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salvador.
In the 27-page complaint, filed by Reuveni's lawyers at the Government Accountability Project, the attorney described a meeting on March 14 in which Bove, the principal associate deputy attorney general, told his subordinates that President Donald Trump would soon invoke the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to quickly remove a group of immigrants from the U.S., sending more than 200 people to El Salvador's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
Bove "stressed to all in attendance that the planes needed to take off no matter what," the complaint reads. He noted that "a court order would enjoin those removals before they could be effectuated," but said the DOJ "would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you' and ignore any such order."
"Mr. Reuveni perceived that others in the room looked stunned, and he observed awkward, nervous glances among people in the room. Silence overtook the room," reads the complaint.
Reuveni also alleged that DOJ lawyer Drew Ensign lied in court on March 15, the day Trump invoked the AEA, when he told Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. that he didn't know whether any deportation flights were scheduled to leave in the coming 24-48 hours.
"Ensign had been present in the previous day's meeting when Emil Bove stated clearly that one or more planes containing individuals subject to the AEA would be taking off over the weekend no matter what," reads the complaint.
Reuveni said that by April, he was "frozen out" of discussions about the Trump administration's use of the AEA to carry out deportations.
That month, he said in a court hearing that the deportation of Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man with no criminal record, had been a mistake. Abrego Garcia was sent to CECOT in March. The administration repeatedly said it would not facilitate his return to the U.S. as it was ordered to by the U.S. Supreme Court, before Abrego Garcia was indicted in Nashville on smuggling charges and abruptly returned to the U.S., where he is still detained, earlier this month.
After the hearing, Ensign asked Reuveni in a phone call why he hadn't supported the administration's claims in court that Abrego Garcia was a terrorist and gang member. He replied that no evidence supported the claim, and noted that even if Abrego Garcia was a criminal he would still be entitled to due process, which he was not afforded when he was sent to El Salvador.
As The New York Timesreported:
The next day, Mr. Reuveni was told he should sign an appeal brief making the terrorism claim against Mr. Abrego Garcia.
Mr. Reuveni's lawyers say he resisted, arguing that the law does not allow advocates to make new factual claims, which he saw as "contrary to law, frivolous, and untrue."
That led to a final standoff with his supervisor... who told him "he should sign the brief and that he had signed up for the responsibility to do so," the account states.
Mr. Reuveni responded, "I didn't sign up to lie."
He was placed on administrative leave hours later, and fired the next week.
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) responded to the report by saying that Bove "does not belong on the federal bench."
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, urged Republicans on the panel "not to turn a blind eye to the dire consequences of confirming Mr. Bove to a lifetime position as a circuit court judge."
"The accusations against Emil Bove are serious. Not only do they speak to his failure to fulfill his ethical obligations as a lawyer, they also demonstrate his part in a broader pattern by the Trump-Bondi DOJ to undermine the rule of law," he said, referring to Attorney General Pam Bondi—who has been accused of "serious professional misconduct that threatens the rule of law and the administration of justice."
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, applauded Reuveni "for having the great courage to come forward to expose the lawlessness of Mr. Bove and Trump's DOJ."
"Whistleblowers are the first line of defense to hold those in power accountable," said Raskin. "The extraordinary nature of the disclosure demands further investigation by Congress, and Judiciary Democrats are committed to getting to the truth on all of the Trump administration's efforts to turn the Department of Justice into a gangster state law firm devoted to violating the rights of the people, lying to federal judges, violating court orders, and persecuting those who uphold their oaths and speak the truth."
The news of the whistleblower complaint came two days after Judge Barbara Holmes of the Federal District Court in Nashville said Abrego Garcia should be freed from immigration detention.
Holmes took issue with the Trump administration's central claim about Abrego Garcia: that he is a member of the gang MS-13.
"Abrego has no reported criminal history of any kind. And his reputed gang membership is contradicted by the government's own evidence," said Holmes.
U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said Holmes' ruling was "remarkable."
The opinion, she said, "completely [dismantled] all the allegations and 'evidence' against him as 'defy[ing] common sense' and not credible."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Say Cruz Proposal Takes Industry-Friendly AI Rules 'From Ludicrous to Insane'
Under Cruz's proposal, states would be required to swear off all regulations on artificial intelligence in order to get funding to improve their high-speed internet.
Jun 24, 2025
Consumer advocates are criticizing a change made by U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz in the Republican megabill this week that would stop states from regulating artificial intelligence in order to bring it in line with the reconciliation process.
The House's version of the $4 trillion budget package, passed last month, contained a sneaky provision that would bar states from enforcing any proposed or existing regulations on AI programs for the next 10 years, which a critic called "one of the most radical positions Republicans have taken."
However, that version of the provision was rejected by the Senate parliamentarian, who oversees chamber rules requiring that reconciliation measures have a budgetary impact.
Cruz (R-Texas), the chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, proposed a workaround: threatening to withhold federal broadband infrastructure funding to coerce states into abandoning AI regulations.
The Senate bill's revised language would impact states' access to funding from the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. Part of former President Joe Biden's 2021 infrastructure law, BEAD allocated $42.45 billion to expand high-speed, affordable internet access across the United States. On Sunday, the parliamentarian approved Cruz's updated version of the bill.
"This backdoor preemption not only forces states into an impossible choice between protecting their residents and providing broadband access, but also undermines public safety, privacy, and democratic governance just as AI harms are accelerating," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen said in a Tuesday statement.
States around the country have introduced dozens of bills aimed at curbing the potential harms of AI programs.
Many states have passed or introduced bills banning the use of AI to generate fake "revenge porn" or election misinformation. Some have enacted laws regulating AI in hiring and healthcare to prevent discrimination. Others have taken steps to ensure AI algorithms do not violate copyright protections.
Last week, Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) held a press conference in which they spoke out against the provision.
"They have adopted these laws that fill a gap while we are waiting for federal action," Cantwell said. "Now Congress is threatening these laws, which will leave hundreds of millions of Americans vulnerable to AI harm by abolishing those state law protections."
If the Republican moratorium passes, states will be forced either to dump these regulations and or hamstring efforts to update their broadband internet infrastructure.
"High‑speed internet is now a prerequisite for economic participation, education, and healthcare," said Tyler Cooper, editor-in-chief for the research group Broadband Now.
A nationwide audit published by the group earlier this month found that 26 million people across the United States lack access to high-speed internet. Cutting broadband funding to states could hinder efforts to connect them.
The parliamentarian's decision to greenlight this new version of the bill has drawn sharp criticism from consumer advocates.
"This extreme measure is a clear gift to Big Tech at the expense of everyday people,” said Ben Winters, director of AI and data privacy for the Consumer Federation of America.
The push to deregulate AI has big money behind it. Last week, the Financial Times reported that "lobbyists acting on behalf of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta are urging the Senate to enact" the moratorium.
According to data from OpenSecrets, these four companies alone spent nearly $19 million on lobbying in just the first three months of 2025.
That avalanche of money has left many doubting that Congress will ever regulate AI. But it also may ensure that states can't either.
"The tipping point from ludicrous to insane is making broadband funding for rural and urban communities contingent on states abandoning their right to protect their citizens—fully knowing Congress has not historically and will likely continue not to regulate Big Tech," said J.B. Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate for Public Citizen.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular