For Rural America, Broadband Access Today is what Electricity Access was 100 Years Ago
Heather Mizeur • April 13, 2021
A century ago, as American cities grew ever stronger and the U.S. solidified its place as the leading industrial economy, millions of rural people were still farming, cooking, and cleaning in conditions basically unchanged for centuries. The modernizing world had left them behind, even as it depended on the food and raw materials they provided. But President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s program to bring electricity to every corner of the country changed all that through a combination of vision, political will, and large-scale federal investment.
Broadband access today is what electricity access was 100 years ago. Without it, rural communities like those on Maryland’s Eastern Shore and elsewhere can’t compete. Our young people lose educational opportunities, and our budding entrepreneurs can’t start businesses. Farmers use technology connections to manage and store data, and even operate certain high-tech machinery. And telecommuting is a challenge for us when it shouldn’t be. Anyone who’s tried to learn while sharing a weak home connection with three or four other users, or driven 30 miles or more to a Starbucks parking lot so they could attend a crucial Zoom meeting, knows what I’m talking about.
Efforts to address the connectivity gap have come and gone for more than a decade. In Maryland, a state task force assigned to review this problem issued a report with recommendations in 2019. In response, Gov. Larry Hogan announced a plan to spend $9.6 million to connect about 5,000 households. It’s a great start, but the problem is much bigger. According to the task force’s own report, over 300,000 Marylanders are without high-speed internet. The Federal Communications Commission reported last year that 18 million Americans lack broadband access, and that’s likely a low estimate.
The piecemeal approach tried so far can bring modest gains, but in the end, large, national problems like this demand national solutions. That’s why I applaud recent efforts at the federal level to address this critical need, especially House Majority Whip James Clyburn’s Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act, a $100 billion initiative to deliver high-speed broadband to underserved areas. Rep. Clyburn formed the House Rural Broadband Task Force in 2019 with the goal of bringing affordable high-speed Internet to 100 percent of Americans. “Since then,” he says, “the disparity between those served and unserved has become even clearer.” Pandemic living has shined a glaring light on the digital divide.
In addition to deploying the physical infrastructure to make near-universal access a reality, the Clyburn bill would also require internet service providers to offer affordable options, provide grants for states to close gaps and help rural students with innovative solutions such as Wi-Fi access on school buses. Given the covid-19 crisis and many competing priorities, the bill has languished since it was introduced last June. Now, with both the Biden administration and Democratic majorities in Congress on record supporting high-speed broadband, this issue needs to move up the list of priorities.
The passage last month of President Biden’s American Rescue Plan presents another opportunity for progress. This sweeping legislation includes $350 billion in aid to state and local governments; Maryland’s share is about $4 billion. Governor Hogan and the General Assembly should dedicate a portion of that funding to meeting the needs identified in the 2019 state task force report. A set-aside of just 2 percent, or $80 million, could put a significant dent in the “last mile” challenge facing the Eastern Shore and elsewhere in rural Maryland.
Some steps have already been taken at the federal level under the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, a 10-year, multibillion-dollar FCC program. But experts have questioned the FCC’s process for disbursing those funds, and the billions spent previously on similar initiatives relied on untrustworthy service-area mapping. Clearly, we need a more robust federal effort — well coordinated, well researched, and adequately funded.
The good news is, after four years of jokes about “Infrastructure Week,” we finally have leadership in Washington that recognizes how critical it is to create and properly maintain the building blocks of a healthy economy: roads, bridges, mass transit, utility lines, and, yes, high-speed broadband. Infrastructure was once a nonpartisan issue, and there’s no reason it can’t be again. Just as Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike want sturdy bridges and safe highways, everyone needs to be able to get online quickly and reliably.
To be sure, this problem does not affect only rural people. The Abell Foundation recently reported that more than 40 percent of households in Baltimore City lack broadband access. But what Rep. Clyburn and his federal Rural Broadband Taskforce have recognized, is how rural people are especially vulnerable to being bypassed in this regard — just as they were in previous eras.
Electrification brought rural America into the 20th century, and life without it soon became unimaginable. In this Information Age, access to high speed Internet has taken its deserved place among the necessities of contemporary life. Every Marylander — indeed, every American — deserves a chance to compete on the even playing field that only universal high-speed broadband provides. Two decades into this new century, we can no longer wait.
Former state delegate Heather Mizeur, a resident of Chestertown, is a Democratic candidate for Congress in Maryland’s First District.
This commentary was first published in The Baltimore Sun on March 15, 2021.
Common Sense for the Eastern Shore
Megan Outten, a lifelong Wicomico County resident and former Salisbury City Councilwoman, officially announced her candidacy recently for Wicomico County Council, District 7. At 33, Outten brings the energy of a new generation combined with a proven record of public service and results-driven leadership. “I’m running because Wicomico deserves better,” Outten said. “Too often, our communities are expected to do more with less. We’re facing underfunded schools, limited economic opportunities, and years of neglected infrastructure. I believe Wicomico deserves leadership that listens, plans ahead, and delivers real, measurable results.” A Record of Action and A Vision for the Future On Salisbury’s City Council, Outten earned a reputation for her proactive, hands-on approach — working directly with residents to close infrastructure gaps, support first responders, and ensure everyday voices were heard. Now she’s bringing that same focus to the County Council, with priorities centered on affordability, public safety, and stronger, more resilient communities. Key Priorities for District 7: Fully fund public schools so every child has the opportunity to succeed. Fix aging infrastructure and county services through proactive investment. Keep Wicomico affordable with smarter planning and pathways to homeownership. Support first responders and safer neighborhoods through better tools, training, and prevention. Expand resources for seniors, youth, and underserved communities. Outten’s platform is rooted in real data and shaped by direct community engagement. With Wicomico now the fastest-growing school system on Maryland’s Eastern Shore — and 85% of students relying on extra resources — she points to the county’s lagging investment as a key area for action. “Strong schools lead to strong jobs, thriving industries, and healthier communities,” Outten said. “Our schools and infrastructure are at a tipping point. We need leadership that stops reacting after things break — and starts investing before they do.” A Commitment to Home and Service Born and raised in Wicomico, Megan Outten sees this campaign as a continuation of her lifelong service to her community. Her vision reflects what she’s hearing from neighbors across the county: a demand for fairness, opportunity, and accountability in local government. “Wicomico is my home; it’s where I grew up, built my life, and where I want to raise my family,” Outten said. “Our county is full of potential. We just need leaders who will listen, work hard, and get things done. That’s what I’ve always done, and that’s exactly what I’ll continue to do on the County Council.” Outten will be meeting with residents across District 7 in the months ahead and unveiling more details of her platform. For more information or to get involved, contact info@meganoutten.com
Way back in 1935, the Supreme Court determined that independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) do not violate the Constitution’s separation of powers. Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935). Congress provided that the CPSC, like the NLRB and MSPB, would operate as an independent agency — a multi-member, bipartisan commission whose members serve staggered terms and could be removed only “for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office but for no other cause.” Rejecting a claim that the removal restriction interferes with the “executive power,” the Humphrey’s Court held that Congress has the authority to “forbid their [members’] removal except for cause” when creating such “quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial” bodies. As a result, these agencies have operated as independent agencies for many decades under many different presidencies. Shortly after assuming office in his second term, Donald Trump began to fire, without cause, the Democratic members of several of these agencies. The lower courts determined to reinstate the discharged members pending the ultimate outcome of the litigation, relying on Humphrey’s , resulting in yet another emergency appeal to the Supreme Court by the administration. In the first such case, a majority of the Court allowed President Trump to discharge the Democratic members of the NLRB and the MSPB while the litigation over the legality of the discharges continued. Trump v. Wilcox (May 22, 2025). The majority claimed that they do not now decide whether Humphrey’s should be overruled because “that question is better left for resolution after full briefing and argument.” However, hinting that these agency members have “considerable” executive power and suggesting that “the Government” faces greater “risk of harm” from an order allowing a removed officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty,” the majority gave the President the green light to proceed. Justice Kagan, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, dissented, asserting that Humphrey’s remains good law until overturned and forecloses both the President’s firings and the Court’s decision to award emergency relief.” Our emergency docket, while fit for some things, should not be used to “overrule or revise existing law.” Moreover, the dissenters contend that the majority’s effort to explain their decision “hardly rises to the occasion.” Maybe by saying that the Commissioners exercise “considerable” executive power, the majority is suggesting that Humphrey’s is no longer good law but if that is what the majority means, then it has foretold a “massive change” in the law and done so on the emergency docket, “with little time, scant briefing, and no argument.” And, the “greater risk of harm” in fact is that Congress provided for these discharged members to serve their full terms, protected from a President’s desire to substitute his political allies. More recently, in the latest shadow docket ruling in the administration’s favor, the same majority of the Court again permitted President Trump to fire, without cause, the Democratic members of another independent agency, this time the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Trump v. Boyle (July 23, 2025). The same three justices dissented, once more objecting to the use of the Court’s emergency docket to destroy the independence of an independent agency as established by Congress. The CPSC, like the NLRB and MSPB, was designed to operate as “a classic independent agency.” In Congress’s view, that structure would better enable the CPSC to achieve its mission — ensuring the safety of consumer products, from toys to appliances — than would a single-party agency under the full control of a single President. “By allowing the President to remove Commissioners for no reason other than their party affiliation, the majority has negated Congress’s choice of agency bipartisanship and independence.” The dissenters also assert that the majority’s sole professed basis for the more recent order in Boyle was its prior order in Wilcox . But in their opinion, Wilcox itself was minimally explained. So, the dissenters claim, the majority rejects the design of Congress for a whole class of agencies by “layering nothing on nothing.” “Next time, though, the majority will have two (if still under-reasoned) orders to cite. Truly, this is ‘turtles all the way down.’” Rapanos v. United States (2006). * ***** *In Rapanos , in a footnote to his plurality opinion, former Supreme Court Justice Scalia explained that this allusion is to a classic story told in different forms and attributed to various authors. His favorite version: An Eastern guru affirms that the earth is supported on the back of a tiger. When asked what supports the tiger, he says it stands upon an elephant; and when asked what supports the elephant, he says it is a giant turtle. When asked, finally, what supports the giant turtle, he is briefly taken aback, but quickly replies "Ah, after that it is turtles all the way down." John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
Marylanders will not forget this vote.
More than 30,000 of our neighbors in Maryland’s first congressional district will lose their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid because of provisions in the GOP’s heartless tax cut and spending bill passed last week.
Right now, Congress is working on a fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs in order to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations.
The House Agriculture Committee recently voted, along party lines, to advance legislation that would cut as much as $300 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program, helping more than 41 million people in the U.S. pay for food. With potential cuts this large, it helps to know who benefits from this program in Maryland, and who would lose this assistance. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities compiled data on SNAP beneficiaries by congressional district, cited below, and produced the Maryland state datasheet , shown below. In Maryland, in 2023-24, 1 in 9 people lived in a household with SNAP benefits. In Maryland’s First Congressional District, in 2023-24: Almost 34,000 households used SNAP benefits. Of those households, 43% had at least one senior (over age 60). 29% of SNAP recipients were people of color. 15% were Black, non-Hispanic, higher than 11.8% nationally. 6% were Hispanic (19.4% nationally). There were 24,700 total veterans (ages 18-64). Of those, 2,200 lived in households that used SNAP benefits (9%). The CBPP SNAP datasheet for Maryland is below. See data from all the states and download factsheets here.
