Communications: broadband internet service providers: affordable home internet.
If enacted, AB 353 would substantially alter the landscape of broadband services in California by mandating ISPs to actively promote and provide affordable options to specified low-income households. These households will be defined as those with at least one resident enrolled in designated public assistance programs like CalFresh or Medi-Cal. Additionally, the legislation requires ISPs to submit annual reports to the Department of Technology detailing the service plans available and the number of households served, which would aid in monitoring and improving service accessibility.
Assembly Bill 353, authored by Assembly Member Boerner, is aimed at increasing digital equity in California by ensuring that every internet service provider (ISP) offers affordable home internet services to eligible households. Under the proposed legislation, affordable internet service must not exceed $15 per month and should meet minimum speed requirements of at least 100 megabits per second downstream and 20 megabits per second upstream. The bill aligns with existing laws such as the Digital Equity Bill of Rights, emphasizing the state's commitment to accessibility and fair treatment in the digital arena.
The sentiment surrounding AB 353 appears generally positive, particularly among advocates for digital rights and access. Supporters argue this measure is essential for closing the digital divide and ensuring that low-income residents can afford necessary internet access, especially in an increasingly digital world. However, there may be concerns from smaller ISPs regarding the feasibility of compliance and potential financial strain, although the bill includes exemptions for smaller providers. Overall, the sentiment is framed around enhancing equality in digital access.
A point of contention regarding AB 353 lies in the provision that explicitly prohibits the Public Utilities Commission from overseeing any aspect of implementation or enforcement, designating the Department of Technology as the sole authority. This change could generate debate about the adequacy of oversight in ensuring that internet service providers meet the requirements of the bill. Furthermore, the bill will become inoperative if a federal or state broadband subsidy program is enacted, which could lead to discussions about the timing and necessity of the state’s efforts in light of broader federal initiatives.