According to Parks Associates, this conservative definition has contributed to a “have nots” segment of the U.S. population (about 13 million homes). This segment tends to be disproportionately less educated, less educated with lower income levels compared to more affluent, fully connected (e.g., higher broadband speeds) households.
In that sense, the law is a step in the right direction as it propagates some level of broadband usage with the entire U.S. population, especially in rural areas. However, I’d argue that higher broadband speeds can have a commendable impact on households of all types, regardless of education and incomes levels. Where you live should not be a limiting factor for the broadband speeds you utilize. While many households access broadband with some type of hard-wired connection to their homes, 5G (and other wireless implementations) will ultimately play an essential role in fulfilling a broadband vision that doesn’t leave any household out, regardless of where they live. I recently penned a Parks Associates white paper for Calix that explores the influential role of “managed Wi-Fi” in the home and speaks to some of the challenges I’ve outlined above that I’d encourage you to read.
From the article "How Meaningful Is The Broadband Element Of The $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Package?"
