Communications: broadband internet service providers: affordable home internet.
If enacted, AB 353 would significantly alter the landscape of internet service provision in California. It mandates that internet service providers actively promote and advertise affordable options to eligible households, thus increasing awareness and potentially reducing barriers to access. Providers will also be required to report annually on the uptake of these services, which will facilitate the state's monitoring of compliance and effectiveness. The bill not only aligns with existing frameworks like the Digital Equity Bill of Rights but also reinforces the notion that all Californians should have access to essential digital services.
Assembly Bill 353, known as the California Affordable Home Internet Act of 2025, seeks to ensure that every California internet service provider offers affordable home internet service to eligible households. This service is defined as internet plans costing no more than $15 per month and must meet certain minimum speed requirements of at least 100 megabits per second downstream and 20 megabits per second upstream. The bill emphasizes the state's commitment to digital equity, ensuring that low-income households participating in public assistance programs have reasonable access to necessary internet services.
The sentiment surrounding AB 353 appears to be largely positive, with proponents highlighting its potential to make a meaningful difference for disadvantaged communities. Supporters argue that affordable access to high-speed internet is a critical step towards bridging the digital divide, enhancing opportunities for education, telehealth, and economic participation. However, there may be concerns regarding the capacity of smaller internet service providers to comply with the new requirements, particularly if they are subject to the same regulations as larger companies.
The primary contention regarding AB 353 lies in the exemptions it provides for certain smaller internet service providers, specifically those serving less than 50,000 subscribers. Critics may argue that such exemptions could undermine the effectiveness of the legislation by allowing some providers to evade responsibility. Moreover, there is discussion on whether the minimum speed requirements are sufficient to meet the growing demands for reliable internet, especially in light of increasing remote work and digital education needs.