California Tried to Make Internet Affordable — Telecom Lobbyists Killed It
A bill to help low-income families get online? Crushed before it had a chance.
If you’ve ever tried to live without internet access in 2025, you already know it’s not just inconvenient — it’s crippling.
No internet means no online school. No job applications. No telehealth appointments. No video calls with family. Even something as simple as renewing a government ID or applying for benefits often requires being online. It’s not a luxury anymore — it’s infrastructure.
That’s why a new bill proposed in California caught my attention. It was simple and kind of hopeful: help make broadband affordable for people who genuinely need it. Nothing radical. No sweeping regulations. Just… fair pricing for low-income households.
But it didn’t even make it to a vote.
Why? Because the moment it was introduced, telecom lobbyists shut it down behind closed doors.
What was actually in the bill?
The bill — now effectively dead — aimed to cap the cost of internet for qualifying low-income residents. Think people enrolled in programs like SNAP, Medicaid, or receiving federal broadband support. It would’ve made sure they had access to reliable internet at prices that wouldn’t eat half their paycheck.
In essence, California was trying to add a safety net to the existing federal Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). That program has already helped millions get online, but it’s at risk of running out of funding — and doesn’t prevent price hikes by providers.
This state-level bill would’ve filled that gap. It would’ve said, “Look, if you’re struggling, we’re going to make sure internet stays affordable — because access should depend on where you live, not how much you make.”
So what happened?
Lobbying happened.
Within days of the bill’s introduction, lobbyists from major telecom companies descended on the legislature. And not quietly.
They claimed the bill would:
- “Interfere with market competition”
- “Discourage innovation”
- “Cause unintended harm to consumers”
But let’s be real — the main reason is profit. Giving regulators the power to enforce fair pricing on broadband cuts into the ability to upsell, bundle, surcharge, and trap people in high-cost contracts. Especially in areas with little or no provider competition.
Instead of arguing the bill in public, telecom lobbyists worked behind the scenes. And just like that, the bill was pulled from committee. No vote. No debate. No headlines.
Why should this worry you?
Because this isn’t a one-off.
This is part of a long pattern:
- Cities try to build municipal broadband? Lobbyists get it banned.
- States try to pass net neutrality protections? Lobbyists kill the effort.
- Regulators try to set minimum standards? Lobbyists drown them in legal threats.
And now, a simple bill to make internet affordable for struggling families? Same story.
If we keep treating internet access like a luxury product instead of a public necessity, we’re going to keep widening the digital divide — and the people falling through the cracks are the ones who need access the most.
My take
This bill wasn’t revolutionary. It was reasonable. And honestly? It should’ve been boring. No one should have to fight this hard to keep broadband from being overpriced and out of reach.
But the fact that it was controversial says everything.
Telecom companies don’t want rules. And when they have the money and influence to crush even the smallest threat to their pricing models, we all lose — not just the poor.
Because today, it’s about capping prices for the vulnerable. Tomorrow, it could be about whether you can even change providers without being punished.
This is what it looks like when essential services are controlled by corporations, not communities.
And if California — one of the most progressive states on tech policy — can’t pass something like this?
We’re going to need more than better laws. We’re going to need people paying attention.
