Twenty-three million families will either have to pay more for internet or cancel their subscriptions altogether if a federal subsidy program to help with the monthly bill runs out of money.

President Joe Biden recently traveled to North Carolina to promote his goal of affordable internet access for all Americans, but the promise for 23 million families across the U.S. is on shaky ground.

That’s because a subsidy that helps people with limited resources afford internet access is set to expire this spring.

The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provides $30 a month for qualifying families in most places and $75 on tribal lands, will run out of money by the end of April if Congress doesn’t extend it further.

“I think this should be high priority for Congress,” North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, a Democrat who has worked with a bipartisan group of governors to promote the program, said in a phone interview. “To many families, $30 a month is a big deal.”

  • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.worldEnglish
    111·
    7 months ago

    Maybe I’m missing the part where the federal program will choose one state to continue funding and exclude the others. Can you help me find it please?

    Otherwise this would look like it’s either a failure to comprehend on your part or an attempt to misinterpret what’s being reported in a way to stir up discontent among people who just skip from the headline and blurb to the comments here.

      • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.worldEnglish
        32·
        7 months ago

        Biden is doing victory laps because he’s trying to bring it back in one state that is coincidentally one he has to win but polls horribly.

        This part. Show me where he’s bringing it back for one state and not others.

          • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.worldEnglish
            32·
            7 months ago

            I’ve seen you make incorrect claims about what he’s doing based on your misunderstanding of what is in the article that started this thread. Your clarification is that you also misinterpreted a different article. I can accept that acknowledgement and hopefully now you are better informed.

            That’s the charitable interpretation anyway, not enough information yet to say that you’re engaging in bad faith.