{
  "id": "R42524",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R42524",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 421932,
      "date": "2013-06-25",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T21:05:06.165331",
      "title": "Rural Broadband: The Roles of the Rural Utilities Service and the Universal Service Fund",
      "summary": "Since the initial deployment of broadband in the late 1990s, Congress has viewed broadband infrastructure deployment as a means towards improving regional economic development, and in the long term, to create jobs. According to the National Broadband Plan, the lack of adequate broadband infrastructure is most pressing in rural America, where the costs of serving large geographical areas, coupled with low population densities, often reduce economic incentives for telecommunications providers to invest in and maintain broadband infrastructure and service. \nHistorically, the federal government has provided financial assistance to give telecommunications providers the capital to invest in rural telecommunications infrastructure and to maintain an adequate return on their investment. Currently, there are two ongoing federal vehicles which direct money to fund broadband in rural areas: the broadband and telecommunications programs at the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Universal Service Fund (USF) programs under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). \nWhile both the RUS and USF programs share some of the same goals (e.g., improving broadband availability and adoption in rural areas), the two programs are different with respect to their funding mechanism, scope, and emphasis. For example, RUS grants and loans are used as up-front capital to invest in broadband infrastructure, while the USF provides ongoing subsidies to keep the operation of telecommunications and broadband networks in high cost areas economically viable for providers. Another key difference is that the RUS programs are funded through annual appropriations, while USF is funded through mandatory contributions from telecommunications carriers that provide interstate service, and is not subject to the annual congressional budget process. \nBoth programs are at a pivotal point in the 113th Congress. The statute authorizing the Rural Broadband Loan and Loan Guarantee program was significantly modified in the 2008 farm bill, and is being addressed once more in the 2013 farm bill. Meanwhile, the USF is undergoing a major and unprecedented transition through a series of reforms being developed by the FCC, and Congress has adopted an oversight role with respect to those reforms. In shaping and monitoring the future evolution of these programs, Congress is assessing how best to leverage these programs to ensure that the goals of the National Broadband Plan\u2014including universal broadband service by 2020\u2014are met to the greatest extent possible.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42524",
          "sha1": "6fda8e3e88ced531bc5562afe7ca2a69e524df4f",
          "filename": "files/20130625_R42524_6fda8e3e88ced531bc5562afe7ca2a69e524df4f.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42524",
          "sha1": "2ad8e00bdf3fd9d48f73543543574c5ac7290a78",
          "filename": "files/20130625_R42524_2ad8e00bdf3fd9d48f73543543574c5ac7290a78.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 2111,
          "name": "Telecommunications and Media Convergence"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc810557/",
      "id": "R42524_2013Feb11",
      "date": "2013-02-11",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Rural Broadband: The Roles of the Rural Utilities Service and the Universal Service Fund",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20130211_R42524_079de487027e67930273b94c05a23edf1566666a.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20130211_R42524_079de487027e67930273b94c05a23edf1566666a.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc85426/",
      "id": "R42524_2012May09",
      "date": "2012-05-09",
      "retrieved": "2012-06-06T14:34:05",
      "title": "Rural Broadband: The Roles of the Rural Utilities Service and the Universal Service Fund",
      "summary": "This report discusses Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Broadband and Telecommunications Programs. Since the initial deployment of broadband in the late 1990s, Congress has viewed broadband infrastructure deployment as a means towards improving regional economic development, and in the long term, to create jobs.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20120509_R42524_bdce87f1cb46db0781694b24e4b01ddce46322a4.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20120509_R42524_bdce87f1cb46db0781694b24e4b01ddce46322a4.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Computer networks",
          "name": "Computer networks"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Information networks",
          "name": "Information networks"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Data transmission systems",
          "name": "Data transmission systems"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Telecommunication",
          "name": "Telecommunication"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Rural economic development",
          "name": "Rural economic development"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations",
    "Health Policy"
  ]
}