Read theMandate

Rural Broadband Protection Act of 2025Section 2 › Proposal

Funding is to go only to applicants who show they qualify

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, section 2, Sec. 2. Written by .

Funding is to go only to applicants who show they qualify

The document says “shallWho acts: Federal Communications CommissionHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says

“the Commission shall provide that, consistent with principles of technology neutrality, the Commission will only award covered funding to applicants that can demonstrate that they meet the qualifications in subparagraph (B)”

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, Sec. 2

What the rules made under paragraph (2) have to say. They are to provide that covered funding goes only to applicants able to demonstrate the qualifications set out in subparagraph (B), and they are to do so consistently with principles of technology neutrality. The section states that constraint without defining technology neutrality.

What the document actually says

“the Commission shall provide that, consistent with principles of technology neutrality, the Commission will only award covered funding to applicants that can demonstrate that they meet the qualifications in subparagraph (B)”

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, Sec. 2
That sentence, in plain words

The FCC may give this money only to those who show they can do the job. It must not pick winners by the kind of tech they use.

What this is about

Anyone may ask for this money. Not everyone will get it. They have to prove they are up to the work first. The kind of gear they use is not the test.

What is disputed
The document does not define this

The section requires the rules to be consistent with principles of technology neutrality but does not define the term or point to a definition elsewhere.

No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.

Share this page

How to Read This Page

The quotation is the document's own words, exactly as printed, and we check the page number against the Act itself before publishing. The paragraph underneath is our summary, not the document's words. So is the plain English version, which is why it sits beside the quotation rather than replacing it.

All proposals in this section →