[tzs]

The arguments at that link are questionable. E.g.

> When states use the federal subsidy to provide access in areas without internet, they no longer have incentives to confirm if the technology being deployed is appropriate for the area or if the customer base needs and wants what is being provided.

It's actually the opposite. When states use federal subsidies they have the freedom to consider the technology that is actually best for the area instead of just what is cheap enough for the state to afford without better help.

When they are limited to whatever is cheapest now they may have to pick something that meets the present needs of rural areas but will be inadequate in a few years.

[SR2Z]

This is also heavily described in _Abundance_. I'm not an expert, but it is beyond doubt that this program did not produce any kind of meaningful results, despite having a moon-landing-sized budget.

Even when it was created, Starlink was obviously the best option for quickly linking rural America to the Internet. That's obvious because that's EXACTLY HOW rural America has actually been linking itself to the Internet, despite it not being covered by the program. In ten years, that's probably still how they'll get online.

I am a Democrat, have been since I could vote, and refuse to vote red for as long as MAGA owns the GOP. It's still exhausting to watch my party flounder and give in to its worst instincts.