HARRISBURG, Pa., Nov. 1, 2026 (AP) — Utah on Wednesday filed criminal charges against prediction market operator Kalshi and two of its executives, months after a federal judge rejected Kalshi's effort to prevent Utah from enforcing its strict anti-gambling laws against the activity.

The felony charges could represent a new tactic in how states try to assert regulatory authority over the fast-expanding activity, a clash that appears headed to a showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

President Donald Trump and his administration are engaged in an unprecedented effort to turn the full power of the federal government against our elections. And Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr is eager to be Trump’s chief lieutenant in that campaign by controlling what voters hear and watch.

The closer we get to Election Day, the clearer the focus on campaigns, voters, and elections becomes.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

At the end of the summer, President Trump trained his ire on the reporting of “fake polls” showing his political weakness and invited the FCC to “do something.” Trump has a history of slapping the “fake” moniker on any news he finds unflattering. Carr then said in an interview he might put out guidance on fake polls.

Then, in late October, Carr seized on reports of fabricated poll results to once again jawbone broadcasters, threatening to invoke the FCC’s “News Distortion” and “Broadcast Hoax” regulations against stations airing fake polls. 

This week, Carr doubled down on his threats, claiming that he was “just reminding broadcasters of existing rules and precedents.” He was not. The FCC has no authority whatsoever to regulate the airing of polls or election results in the absence of concrete evidence that a broadcaster intentionally falsified its reporting.

For more than half a century, under Republican and Democratic chairs alike, the FCC has consistently affirmed that it has no authority to dictate how broadcasters report polls or election results.

In 1970 a California voter asked the FCC to stop broadcasters from reporting horse-race polling in the month before an election. The FCC ruled that any such measure would violate both the First Amendment’s and the Communications Act’s prohibition on government censorship. Two years later, then-Governor Ronald Reagan asked the Commission to prohibit the airing of election results projections before West Coast polls had closed.

Again the Commission demurred, citing anti-censorship laws. The FCC remained consistent on this point, later refusing an invitation to investigate networks for calling the Florida race for Al Gore over George W. Bush while polls remained open. And the Commission reiterated the point at the tail end of the Biden administration.

Carr’s statement about “existing rules and precedents” seems to refer to a 1968 incident, where the FCC chastised broadcasters for airing the results of their own shoddily constructed polls without explaining what they were. But the Commission explicitly repudiated that statement in 1983.

Carr’s goal has always been the same, and it has always been fundamentally political: Prevent Americans from hearing news the President doesn’t like in order to tilt the playing field in his favor.

Since taking office, Carr has deployed the FCC as a weapon aimed at chilling broadcasters’ speech. His abuses have taken the form of threats (e.g., Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension) and formal investigations and proceedings, like the early license renewal of ABC, sometimes linked to the added leverage of a pending corporate merger (e.g., the revival of a zombie news-distortion complaint over 60 Minutes’ Kamala Harris interview).

Earlier this year, the Commission investigated The View over an interview with Democratic Texas Senate candidate James Talarico. And CBS kept Stephen Colbert’s interview with Talarico off the air after Carr issued legally dubious new guidance questioning whether late-night shows qualify for the “bona fide news interview" exemption to equal-time requirements.

As Election Day approaches, it’s obvious that Carr’s agenda is part of the Trump administration’s three-pronged strategy to undermine free and fair elections: deceive voters about the trustworthiness of election systems, disrupt the smooth operation of those systems, and use any ensuing chaos to deny election outcomes if their preferred candidates don’t win.

The “deny” piece is particularly relevant here. It’s much easier to claim your party’s losses can’t possibly be legitimate if you suppress polling that predicts those losses, or exit polling that supports them.

Polling establishes expectations. Race projections and live results establish the public understanding of what actually happened. That’s what makes the logical next step even more disconcerting. 

Carr could well use these same tactics to influence how the networks cover the election results themselves—pressuring them to suppress reporting on vote counts, delay race calls for Democrats, or air baseless accusations of voting fraud, to name a few examples. The goal of all this would be to lay the groundwork for rejecting legitimate election outcomes.

Carr does not, however, have the Constitution, the law, or the FCC’s own regulations on his side. His success depends on coercing and intimidating broadcasters into doing what he cannot legally order them to do. 

Broadcasters must stand firm, confident that the law is on their side. The media’s role in informing the public is most vital around elections--this is the moment where broadcasters must stiffen their spines to perform their role in our democracy that warrants their First Amendment protections. Any other choice in response to Carr's threats would be a shameful abdication of the press's position as the Fourth Estate.

Rachel Goodman co-leads Protect Democracy’s Free Expression and the Right to Dissent team, working to protect speech and press freedom through litigation and other forms of advocacy. Rachel has developed and filed impact litigation for 15 years, including leading Protect Democracy’s Law for Truth project. Rachel began her career at the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, where she filed housing discrimination cases and led successful efforts to force Facebook to disallow racial discrimination in its advertising. This Expert Opinion is Exclusive to Broadband Breakfast.

Broadband Breakfast accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to commentary@breakfast.media. The views expressed in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadband Breakfast and Breakfast Media LLC.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30, 2026 – Spectrum is pulling Cox out of a federal broadband expansion program, the company told regulators this week.

Although Cox subsidiaries had built out to “a substantial number” of the 8,212 rural locations they were set to serve under the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, Spectrum said it was pulling them out “due to challenges, including related to speed testing and service milestone requirements.”

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

Under RDOF rules, defaulting ISPs can be fined 1.89 times their total average support per location, plus 10 percent of the support already received. FCC data says the company received more than $2.9 million in RDOF support as of this week.

Given the company’s total awarded support of more than $6.6 million, that would put a potential fine at about $12.7 million.

Attorneys for Spectrum, still legally called Charter Communications, wrote the following:

“Charter understands that, by withdrawing from the RDOF program, the Cox Entities will no longer receive RDOF support and may be subject to the Commission’s applicable non-compliance rules. Charter reserves its right to seek relief from such rules on behalf of the Cox Entities, including waiver, as may be necessary.” 

The company completed its $34.5 billion merger with Cox Communications in August, creating the largest cable operator in the country.

The company has asked to go by Spectrum, its consumer-facing brand name, since the merger closed. Its legal name will change to Cox Communications in the coming months.

Cox’s remaining unserved locations will be eligible for grants under a supplementary funding round managed by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. 

Spectrum told the FCC it gave NTIA a list of the remaining locations so they would get served through that effort. The process will take months, as NTIA is still finalizing lists of potentially eligible locations, which state broadband offices will refine before taking additional bids.

Cox subscriber trends

Last week, Spectrum published Cox’s subscriber and financial metrics, which weren't previously public given Cox was a private company.

The subscriber losses at Cox were worse than expected, according to analysts at New Street Research.

“It is no surprise that Cox has been losing broadband subscribers but the pace at which they’ve been losing them is above what we estimated,” New Street analyst Vikash Harlalka wrote in an investor note.

The year-over-year decline in broadband subscribers was three times worse at Cox than Charter before the merger, Harlalka wrote.

That made sense in the context of Cox’s high prices, he wrote. For broadband subscribers, Cox’s average revenue per user was nearly $86 in the second quarter, compared to $70 at Charter.

Cable companies have been buffeted by subscriber losses in recent years amid competition from fixed wireless and fiber, and lowering prices is a step most have been taking in a bid to restore their reputations with customers.

Spectrum will report third quarter results on Friday, Nov. 6.

Vermonters with a need for speed now have a way to find out exactly how much they are getting.

Earlier this month, the Vermont Community Broadband Board (VCBB) launched VT Speed Check, a new website where Vermont residents and businesses can check their Internet speed and follow the progression of where high-speed Internet access is available across the state as the state’s CUD’s build out new networks.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

The site will also help residents fix problems they may be experiencing with their Internet connections.

In partnership with Ookla — a leading connectivity intelligence and performance metrics company — the new website includes a speed test to determine just how fast (or not) household Internet connections are, a map that anonymously aggregates speed test results, tools to help residents learn how their Internet connection working, and troubleshooting tips to fix problems.

“Taking speed tests is so important,” VCBB Executive Director Christine Hallquist said in announcing the launch. “It’s about transparency and accountability for the individual and the state.”

“Vermonters can run a speed test and troubleshoot problems they’re having with their Internet, and we’ll be able to see results on a bigger scale to help us pinpoint areas that are having challenges and need more focus from us. We are asking all Vermonters to visit VT Speed Check, test your speed, and test it often.”

How it works

To run the test, residents first have to go to the VT Speed Check website and download the speed test app on their computer.

Results of speed tests produce more accurate location information when the app is downloaded to a computer, officials said, noting how the app does work on mobile devices “but the results aren’t as useful because — unless you’re connected to your home Wi-Fi when you take the test — it will not measure the speed of your home service.” (Also, the map does not work on the mobile app).

Once households take the speed test and get the results, the website will explain what the results mean and offer tips on how to fix many of the common problems associated with getting slower-than-expected speeds.

One handy feature of the website is that it will not only explain what various speed levels mean but also tell the user what features they can and can’t use on their computers.

“For example, two megabits per second can support email, but your video and downloads won’t be great if they work at all. On the other end, consistent speeds at 100 megabits per second will get you seamless video streaming, fast downloads and uploads, and enough capacity for typical home or small office use,” VCBB officials explain.

Additionally, the website breaks down the difference between download speed, upload speed, and latency, each of which is displayed when a speed test is run.

Of course, the more speed tests that are collected, the better the data will be — which is why VCBB officials are encouraging Vermonters to “try testing at different times of the day and different days of the week. You’ll likely find slower speeds during times when more people are online, such as evenings.”

Speed mapping

After speed tests are taken and the results are aggregated into the VT Speed Check map, participants can explore the map and watch as more Vermonters get connected, providing a window into ongoing speed tests and whether the results are getting better.

VCBB officials say speed test results are counted by location in each hexagon on the map and are grouped by their speed, and shown as a percentage of tests. Areas with less than 100 * 20 Megabits per second (Mbps) speeds will have no color, asymmetrical service at or above 100 * 20 is shown in shades of brown, and symmetrical service of at least 50 * 50 and capable of 100 * 100 or greater is shown in shades of green.

At least one completed test is required for results to appear in a hexagon, Herryn Herzog, VCBB Communications, Strategy, and Policy Director, tells ILSR.

“The map will be updated periodically as additional test results become available. The hex is based on percentage of locations because there are such variations on numbers of locations in each hex. This helps make the symbology more uniform. For example, if there are 4 locations in a hex, as soon as one is served it's the lightest color, if there are 40 locations in a hex, it turns the lightest green once a single test is taken but stays lightest green until unique 11 tests are run in that hex."

The results, Herzog said, “will serve as supplemental data to the FCC’s National Broadband Map. It can provide additional insights into broadband performance across Vermont.”

Herzog also said the VCBB is well aware that some households might be less inclined to participate in this voluntary initiative because they may not understand how to do it or how it can help improve Internet access across the state.

“The VCBB recognizes that people without Internet access face barriers to participating in speed tests. To help address these challenges, the VCBB collaborates with local communities and organizations,” she said, adding how its “pilot device donation program (will) provide devices to restorative justice centers (and) these community partnerships can help identify barriers to participation, expand access to testing, and encourage more Vermonters to contribute data so we can see the results of the ongoing investment and hard work to build out broadband in Vermont, as well as helping people get the most out of their connection.”

While the VT Speed Check website is new, the VCBB is not new to collecting speed test information. From January 2023 through September 2026, the state has tallied a total of 1,454,850 tests, Herzog tells ILSR —  a figure that can serve as the baseline for comparison with future test submissions.

“We will receive October test results on Nov. 1, which will represent tests that have happened since the official VT Speed Check announcement and launch,” she said.

A model for other states?

What Vermont is doing is something we think is wise for other states to consider implementing.

The FCC’s National Broadband Map is largely based on provider-reported data. And, as a recent GAO report underscored, the map has long been riddled with inaccuracies that make it hard to know where Internet service misses the mark.

A state-administered tool that measures actual speeds at the location level provides data that ISPs can’t or won’t: ground truth that better pinpoints where investments ought to be made — and to track whether new networks are delivering what they promise. To do that properly, it’s important to collect numerous speed tests ideally over multiple years.

(An ILSR search found only nine other states that have launched statewide efforts to collect speed test data: Colorado, Minnesota, Washington, Hawaii, California, West Virginia, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maine).

In Vermont, with more than 1.4 million tests already having been collected since 2023 as a baseline, soon Vermont will be able to measure the difference that new networks largely being built by the CUDs are making. We would expect to see a marked improvement, given that the bulk of new connections being built in the state are fiber — the gold-standard of Internet access technologies.

In the meantime, the ask is simple for Vermonters: take the test, and take it often.

For that, a step-by-step video and more resources can be found on the VCBB website, which includes a link to a survey about Internet use, comfort with online tasks, access to devices, and digital technology challenges residents face.

In addition to the speed tests, the survey information — with the responses kept confidential — is also important data to collect, VCBB officials note, because it “will help shape programs for affordability, digital skills and cybersecurity training, and workforce development.”

This article comes from the Community Broadband Networks Initiative of the Institute for Local Self Reliance, and was published on CommunityNets.org on October 29, 2026, and is reprinted with permission.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30, 2026 – A group of 21 House Democrats wants a GOP Federal Communications Commissioner nomination to be advanced only alongside a renomination of the agency’s lone Democrat.

“The Commission functions as intended only when both parties have a seat at the table,” the lawmakers wrote Thursday. “Confirming an additional Republican nominee without also securing continued Democratic representation would upset that balance.”

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

This summer President Donald Trump nominated Danielle Thumann Severs, a top advisor to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, to fill one of the two vacancies at the agency. If confirmed, she would give Republicans a 3-1 majority.

FCC nominations have historically paired Republican and Democratic appointees. Last year, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., opposed FCC Commissioner Olivia Trusty’s nomination because she wasn’t paired with a Democrat.

Thumann’s confirmation hearing was initially set for Sept. 17, but was postponed when Thumann gave birth days before the hearing. It hasn’t been officially rescheduled yet.

The office of Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on what the hearing would be rescheduled. If Republicans lose control of the Senate after next week’s midterm elections, they would have until January 2027 to move the nomination forward before Democratic lawmakers took the helm.  

The Thursday lette to top Senate Republicans was led by Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., who sits on the House Commerce Committee.

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez’s term officially ended in July, but she can stay in her post until the end of the next Congress, in January 2028, unless she’s replaced. 

A maximum of three of the FCC’s five members can be from the president’s party. The agency needs at least three active members to have a quorum and vote on new proposals and rules.

Asked in June why she thought Trump had yet to fire her as he had many other Democratic appointees, Gomez responded: “I don’t know, but I’m assuming the quorum is a good reason.”

Last month Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., wrote a letter to Gomez arguing that it would be illegal for President Donald Trump to fire her once Thumann is confirmed. He argued the language of the 1982 law resizing the commission mandated some minority party members regardless of the number of active members.

Asked about the letter at the agency’s open meeting Thursday, Gomez said she was “still reviewing the letter. I do agree, though, that it is an open question.”

The agency “works best when it’s fully staffed and when it has a diversity of viewpoints, which also ensures the stability of our decisions,” she said. “I hope we will soon have a fully staffed, multi-member, multi-party commission as Congress intended.”

In an August Harvard Business Review paper, former FCC Chief of Staff Blair Levin said it was likely Trump would nominate a third Republican before firing Gomez, if he were going to, to avoid the disruption that would come from lacking a quorum.

But he cautioned that that path also faced "legal and political challenges," and could be fought in court. Carr also already has a 2-1 majority that has allowed him to advance his and the Trump administration’s agenda, he noted.

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence is reshaping how governments think about data centers. Once viewed primarily as technical facilities, AI data centers have become a central focus of public policy discussions because of their growing impact on electricity demand, water resources, land use, and local infrastructure balanced with their economic and strategic benefits.

These are appropriate priorities. Policymakers have an important responsibility to balance economic development with resource planning, environmental stewardship, and community interests.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

Yet responsible AI infrastructure depends on more than policies governing where facilities are built and how resources are managed. Once a data center is approved and enters operation, its long-term performance is determined by the engineering practices, quality systems, and operational disciplines that guide its design, construction, commissioning, and lifecycle management. Those practices are rarely defined in legislation or regulation. Instead, they are established through consensus-based industry standards.

Public policy defines the outcomes society expects. Consensus standards provide the technical, quality and security framework for achieving those outcomes consistently, transparently, and at scale.

AI data centers are reshaping infrastructure planning

The massive compute demands of generative AI are accelerating data center construction around the world while fundamentally changing infrastructure requirements. Rack densities exceeding 100 kW, widespread adoption of direct liquid cooling, expanding fiber connectivity, and increasing electrical capacity are driving facilities to levels of complexity that were uncommon only a few years ago.

Although data centers have been deployed for decades, these changes have elevated data centers from relatively low-profile infrastructure projects to a more prominent consideration in state and local planning. New facilities can influence utility investments, transmission planning, water availability, permitting processes, workforce development, and long-term economic strategy.

As policymakers respond, much of the conversation has appropriately focused on energy consumption, water use, environmental impacts, ratepayer protections, community engagement, workforce capacity and economic competitiveness. These issues shape whether and where facilities are developed.

Equally important, however, is ensuring that approved facilities are built and operated according to recognized engineering and quality practices that support reliable, resilient, secure, and efficient operation over decades of service.

Why standards matter in public policy

While government regulations influence safety, environmental protection and infrastructure development, they generally do not prescribe detailed engineering practices for critical infrastructure. Nor are they intended to. Technology evolves too rapidly for regulations to specify design methods, equipment architectures, or operational procedures.

Consensus technical and operational standards provide a mechanism for translating policy objectives into measurable requirements and ensuring those requirements are consistently met.

Developed collaboratively by industry experts, standards translate broad public policy objectives into measurable technical requirements. They establish common expectations for design, interoperability, quality, resilience, security, and operational accountability while remaining technology-neutral and adaptable as infrastructure evolves.

Rather than creating unique technical requirements for every jurisdiction, policymakers can reference recognized standards to support permitting, procurement, certification, and oversight. This approach encourages innovation while providing consistency, transparency, and confidence for regulators, operators, suppliers, investors, and surrounding communities.

In this way, standards become an important complement to public policy—not by replacing regulation, but by providing the technical foundation that enables policy objectives to be implemented and verified.

Standards supporting responsible AI infrastructure

As AI infrastructure continues to evolve, consensus standards help establish consistent engineering and operational practices across increasingly complex facilities and supply chains.

• ANSI/TIA-942: A Common Framework for Data Center Infrastructure

ANSI/TIA-942 provides comprehensive requirements for data center design, telecommunications infrastructure, power distribution, cooling systems, cabling, redundancy, and operational reliability. It establishes a common technical baseline that enables owners, designers, contractors, auditors, and operators to work from consistent infrastructure expectations throughout the facility lifecycle.

Recognizing the rapid evolution of AI and high-performance computing (HPC) environments, TIA is currently developing an AI Addendum to ANSI/TIA-942. The addendum will provide guidance for infrastructure supporting high-density power distribution, advanced liquid cooling architectures, high-fiber-count cabling, and other design considerations unique to AI workloads. By extending established industry practices to address next-generation computing environments, the addendum will help ensure that data center standards continue to evolve alongside the technologies they support.

• DCE 9000: Quality Across the Infrastructure Lifecycle

Building reliable AI infrastructure depends not only on sound engineering but also on disciplined execution.

TIA's Data Center Excellence Quality Management System Standard (DCE 9000) establishes a quality management framework specifically designed for the organizations responsible for designing, manufacturing, installing, integrating, commissioning, and maintaining critical data center infrastructure.

Built upon ISO 9001 while incorporating best practices from established industry quality systems, DCE 9000 emphasizes process consistency, supplier accountability, risk management, commissioning, and continual improvement throughout the physical infrastructure lifecycle.

For policymakers focused on long-term infrastructure resilience, quality management provides confidence that facilities are constructed and maintained using repeatable, auditable processes rather than project-specific practices.

• SCS 9001: Strengthening Trust Across the Supply Chain

Responsible infrastructure also depends on trusted supply chains.

Modern AI data centers rely on globally sourced equipment and increasingly complex supplier ecosystems. Components supporting networking, power, cooling, automation, and control systems originate from numerous manufacturers and suppliers across multiple countries.

TIA's SCS 9001 Supply Chain Security Management System Standard provides organizations with a structured framework for managing supply chain security risks throughout the lifecycle of network-connected products. The standard promotes disciplined supplier management, secure development practices, risk assessment, product integrity, and lifecycle accountability.

As policymakers place greater emphasis on trusted digital infrastructure and supply chain resilience, standards such as SCS 9001 help organizations demonstrate that security extends beyond cybersecurity to include the integrity and governance of the products entering critical infrastructure.

A shared technical foundation for accountability

Responsible AI data center development requires collaboration among many stakeholders.

Policymakers establish public objectives related to economic development, environmental stewardship, resource management, and community interests. Utilities plan for future demand and grid reliability. Operators, designers, suppliers, contractors, certification bodies, and auditors are responsible for ensuring that facilities are engineered, built, commissioned, and maintained according to recognized technical practices.

Consensus standards provide the common technical language that connects these responsibilities.

They allow diverse stakeholders to evaluate infrastructure using measurable, widely accepted criteria rather than inconsistent project-specific interpretations. Designers and suppliers understand expectations before construction begins. Operators benefit from consistent lifecycle practices. Independent auditors can verify conformance using objective requirements. Communities and policymakers gain greater confidence that responsible development extends beyond planning commitments into day-to-day operation.

Without consensus standards, expectations for quality, resilience, interoperability, and supply chain integrity can vary significantly between projects. With standards, responsible development becomes repeatable, measurable, and independently verifiable.

Policy and standards must advance together

The conversation surrounding AI data centers will continue to focus on electricity, water resources, environmental impacts, community planning, job creation and workforce development, and the broader economic benefits associated with digital infrastructure investment.  Those issues are—and will remain—essential components of responsible development.

But they represent only part of the picture.

Long-term resilience and success also depend on the technical practices governing how facilities are designed, constructed, commissioned, secured, and maintained throughout their operational lives.

Consensus-based standards provide the engineering foundation that complements public policy. They translate broad policy objectives into measurable technical practices, enabling infrastructure that is reliable, secure, interoperable, resilient, and accountable without limiting innovation or prescribing specific technologies.

As governments shape the next generation of AI infrastructure policy, consensus standards should be recognized not as an afterthought, but as an essential component of responsible development. Public policy helps define the destination. Standards provide the technical roadmap for getting there.

To learn about TIA Standards, visit tiaonline.org or contact membership@tiaonline.org.

Melissa Newman is the senior vice president of government affairs at TIA, and has more than 20 years of experience in telecommunications companies with expertise in government affairs, public relations and legal. Recently, Newman worked at Transit Wireless as vice president of external affairs and senior legal counsel in New York City where she oversaw contract negotiations, human resources and external affairs for the company. Prior to this position, Melissa worked at WBK, a telecommunications law firm in Washington, D.C., and was deputy division chief of the Policy Division in the Common Carrier Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission. This Expert Opinion is Exclusive to Broadband Breakfast.

Broadband Breakfast accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to commentary@breakfast.media. The views expressed in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadband Breakfast and Breakfast Media LLC.

WASHINGTON Oct. 30, 2026 — AT&T will move customer service for its home internet, home phone and postpaid wireless customers to U.S.-based employees by the end of 2027, the company announced Wednesday. The move is part of a broader effort to expand domestic hiring and create more opportunities for workers without four-year college degrees.

In a company blog post, Shawna Erdmann, AT&T’s senior vice president of talent and development, said the company has hired 10,000 technicians since the beginning of 2023 to build and maintain its fiber network. AT&T expects to hire approximately 3,000 additional technicians in 2026 alone. The company said many of the new customer service positions will be full-time union jobs, as it works to reduce its reliance on contractors.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

The move follows a broader push by the Federal Communications Commission to encourage companies to bring call center jobs back to the United States. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said in March that the agency was pursuing proposals to encourage domestic hiring, improve customer service and address security concerns involving overseas call centers.

 “We think it makes sense to tell people it's time to bring these jobs home,” Carr said.

Erdmann said nearly all AT&T jobs do not require a four-year degree and that the company provides ongoing training and career development. AT&T’s hiring strategy comes as the telecommunications industry expands fiber infrastructure to meet growing demand for connectivity and as artificial intelligence reshapes the workforce.

The company said its domestic customer service commitment reflects its belief that U.S.-based representatives can improve customer satisfaction while supporting stable employment. AT&T also cited an estimate from the Alliance for America’s Skilled Trades that employers will need to fill about 1.7 million skilled-trades openings annually through 2035, while training programs produce only about half the workers needed.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30, 2026 – The head of the Federal Communications Commission has prepared an order that would preempt California’s copper retirement rules, the agency said Thursday.

AT&T asked for the move in May, following a March FCC order that invited companies to ask the agency to set aside state regulations that hindered their copper retirement efforts. The request has been supported by the wireless industry and opposed by state regulators and consumer advocates.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

The FCC has already granted AT&T’s request to turn off copper telephone service at more than 184,000 locations in California. The California Public Utilities Commission has more stringent rules about what qualifies as an adequate replacement service — FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has been happy to accept reported wireless coverage — which has prevented the company from acting on the FCC approval.

ISPs are eager to decommission their old copper networks, which are costly to maintain and no longer provide competitive broadband speeds. The FCC and state agencies regulate the process to avoid rural areas being stranded without essential 911 services.

In a release, the FCC said its proposed order would preempt California regulations that prevented companies from moving forward with discontinuances approved by the FCC. 

“This ensures that state obligations cannot be used in a manner that prevents a provider from effectuating a discontinuance that the Commission has approved,” the agency said.

Other states have been more receptive to ISP discontinuance efforts, and the FCC has been looking to make the process easier, which Carr had said will free up cash for network investments. AT&Thad said it spent $6 billion annually maintaining its copper, which it’s in the process of retiring nationwide.

The CPUC did not respond to requests for comment on whether it would challenge an FCC preemption order in court. AT&T has already sued the CPUC in federal court, arguing its rules are already preempted under the language of the March FCC order.

An AT&T spokesperson said the company was happy to see the preemption order circulated.

“California deserves fast, reliable, future-ready technology – and with the right policies in place, we’re delivering it and transitioning away from copper. No customer will be left without access to voice or 911 service, and we’re committed to working with our customers every step of the way during this transition,” the spokesperson said in an email. “We look forward to the FCC’s decision.”

In a bid to show consumers wouldn’t be left hanging, the carrier said in May that it would invest $19 billion in fiber expansion in California by 2030, which it said would reach an extra 4 million homes.

On AT&T’s earnings call last week, CEO John Stankey said the company had no remaining customers at 100 of its 4,600 copper wire centers. At 85 percent of its wire centers, including some in California, AT&T has grandfathered services and stopped offering them to new customers.

The company was on track to stop service at 50 percent of its wire centers outside of California, and reach almost all of them by the end of 2029, Stankey said.

AT&T has FCC approval to start turning off copper services in another batch of 18 states starting Nov. 15. The company had two other retirement requests automatically approved by the FCC earlier this month.

Other companies have also been making a push to retire copper. Some of Verizon’s efforts have hit a snag, however. After pushback from state regulators who wanted more granular wireless coverage data, the FCC said it needed more time than usual to review a Verizon application to turn off copper service in nine states.

AT&T lawsuit against CPUC

California is asking judges to dismiss AT&T’s lawsuit against the state. AT&T sued in May, arguing even without an explicit preemption order like the one now being circulated, California’s rules were still blocked by the March FCC order.

The CPUC argued in a Thursday filing that its rules don’t block copper retirement at all. They require a level of minimum reliable service, but the agency doesn’t care if companies provide that using something other than copper.

“AT&T does not wish to merely replace the service it offers via copper wire with new technology,” the agency wrote. “Rather, what AT&T really wants is to stop providing basic service — the minimum level of telephone service to which Californians are entitled — altogether.”

Join Broadband Breakfast on location in New Orleans at Broadband Nation Expo 2026, on Wednesday, November 18 at a special time of 1 p.m. ET / 12 Noon CT. We’ll conduct video interviews live from exhibitors and attendees at the event. The expo brings together service providers, policymakers, technology innovators and community leaders working to expand high-speed Internet access. Including: BEAD implementation, digital inclusion, rural and urban buildouts, workforce development, wireless innovation and AI in broadband networks.

Panelists

• Panelists have been invited
• Drew Clark (moderator), CEO and Publisher, Broadband Breakfast

Breakfast Media LLC CEO Drew Clark has led the Broadband Breakfast community since 2008. An early proponent of better broadband, better lives, he initially founded the Broadband Census crowdsourcing tool to collect and verify broadband data left unpublished by the Federal Communications Commission. As CEO and Publisher, Clark presides over the leading media community advocating for higher-capacity internet everywhere through topical, timely and intelligent coverage. Clark also served as head of the Partnership for a Connected Illinois, a state broadband initiative.

This article summarizes several of the key points in Lesson 10. Public Safety, the Military and Global Satellite Services, which is part of Broadband Breakfast's online course, "150 Years of American Telecommunications." A new lesson will be released every Monday.

On Aug. 31, 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed a law putting America’s role in a global satellite communications system in private hands.

Sign up for Free and Join Section A of the course!

Sign up for Free!

The Communications Satellite Act authorized the creation of Comsat, an investor-owned company charged with developing and operating the American portion of the system. Washington would help oversee the enterprise, but telephone companies and public shareholders would own it.

The technology had already crossed the Atlantic. In July, AT&T, the company that dominated American telephone service, used its experimental Telstar 1 satellite to relay live television between the United States and Europe. Congress now had to decide who would control the commercial system that followed.

In Europe, the mail carrier ran the satellite dish. In Britain, the General Post Office delivered letters and ran the phones, and it built a ground station in the southwestern county of Cornwall that caught Telstar’s signals. In West Germany, the state postal agency, the Deutsche Bundespost, played the same part.

In Japan, a 1953 law moved overseas calling into a separate company, Kokusai Denshin Denwa, or KDD, while a government-owned corporation kept running phones at home.

The American arrangement was contentious. Taxpayers had paid for the rockets and much of the space research that made satellites possible, and opponents called the bill a giveaway to AT&T. Ten Democratic senators mounted a filibuster against the legislation.

On Aug. 14, about two weeks before Kennedy signed the bill, the Senate voted to shut down the filibuster. It was the first time since 1927 that senators had mustered the votes to force an end to debate, a vote known as cloture.

Comsat’s ownership tried to satisfy rival camps. AT&T and other phone companies aspired to own the system, while the bill’s opponents wanted the government to own it. Communications carriers, including AT&T, initially held half its stock, while public investors held the other half. The president appointed three of its 15 directors.

“The general public, the communications industry, and the Federal Government all will have a voice,” Kennedy said when he signed the law.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

That compromise limited the established carriers’ control while giving Comsat a privileged position as the American representative in the international system. Critics saw a contradiction in using a new monopoly to keep existing ones in check.

The network took shape quickly. Eleven countries formed the international satellite consortium Intelsat in 1964, with Comsat as its manager. Its first commercial satellite, Early Bird, began carrying traffic across the Atlantic on June 28, 1965.

Three digits, no master plan

Satellites got a federal charter and a single national company. A few years later, a far humbler piece of telephone history got neither: the number Americans dial in an emergency. Its story unfolded town by town.

Before 911, someone reporting a house fire, a break-in or a heart attack often had to look up a separate seven-digit number for the police, the fire department or an ambulance, or dial zero and hope the operator could connect them. In 1967, a presidential commission on crime urged a single nationwide number for emergencies. AT&T answered on Jan. 12, 1968, announcing 911.

The first call came a month later, and it did not run on AT&T’s network. On Feb. 16, Alabama House Speaker Rankin Fite dialed 911 from city hall in Haleyville, a town of about 4,000 people in northwest Alabama. The line belonged to Alabama Telephone Co., a small independent carrier outside AT&T’s Bell System, which had beaten the giant to the switch.

Unlike Comsat, 911 began without a federal charter or a nationwide funding commitment. Local governments and telephone companies introduced the service community by community. Telephone bill surcharges became an important source of funding, but adoption took decades. By 1987, only about half the U.S. population had access.

Congress took a different approach to communications for emergency personnel in 2012. It created the First Responder Network Authority, known as FirstNet, to oversee a nationwide public safety broadband network. Lawmakers provided dedicated airwaves and $7 billion in funding, giving the project a national framework that 911 had lacked at its inception.

Modernizing emergency call centers is the next test. Next Generation 911 replaces older telephone-based systems with internet-based networks capable of handling texts, photos and video alongside voice calls. Federal support has included more than $109 million in grants announced in 2019.

Lesson 10 also examines the military’s first satellite constellation and the Federal Communications Commission’s 1972 Open Skies policy, which opened domestic satellite communications to additional competitors. Lesson 9 explains how satellites transformed cable television’s programming business. Lesson 33 returns to networks in low Earth orbit.

AT&T: FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has circulated a proposed order that would preempt certain California regulations that carriers say hinder efforts to retire legacy copper networks and transition customers to modern IP-based services. The proposal follows the FCC’s unanimous adoption in March of its Network Modernization Order,which aimed to accelerate investment in next-generation communications infrastructure by allowing providers to discontinue aging copper networks and redirect billions of dollars in annual maintenance costs toward high-speed broadband deployment.

“California deserves fast, reliable, future-ready technology – and with the right policies in place, we’re delivering it and transitioning away from copper. No customer will be left without access to voice or 911 service, and we’re committed to working with our customers every step of the way during this transition. We look forward to the FCC’s decision,” an AT&T spokesperson said. (More after paywall)

HARRISBURG, Pa., Oct. 29, 2026 (AP) — New York is enacting farther-reaching restrictions on companion chatbot behavior, as states increasingly move to protect children who use artificial intelligence, regulate how employers deploy AI systems and push developers to prevent an AI-caused catastrophe.

Legislation signed Wednesday by Gov. Kathy Hochul outlines a dozen definitions of “unsafe AI companion features” that will be prohibited when a companion chatbot interacts with a child under 18.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

A violation could expose a chatbot developer to a lawsuit by the state attorney general's office. Penalties could include monetary damages, shutting down the chatbot and destroying data. The law takes effect Jan. 1.

Hochul, in the thick of her reelection campaign, signed the bill amid growing warnings about the existential risks posed by the rapid development of AI technology and calls for bold action by a reluctant Washington.

With Congress doing little to regulate AI, state legislatures are packed with efforts to wield state consumer protection laws to make AI use more transparent and rein in chatbots and rogue AI frontier models.

New York and California are at the vanguard of such laws that also are targeting social media platforms.

In September, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation requiring chatbot developers to assess a model's risk to children, show how they tried to eliminate those risks and submit to an independent audit to determine whether they are complying with the law.

He also signed legislation to prohibit social media platforms from deploying addictive features for users under 16.

Meanwhile, eight states sued AI giant OpenAI earlier this month, saying the company’s popular chatbot model violated state consumer protection laws by hurting children and deceiving adults in what one activist called “the most significant coordinated state action ever taken against an artificial intelligence company.”

However, governors acknowledge that Congress and the federal government have farther-reaching abilities to clamp down on AI-posed threats, even as President Donald Trump has brushed off concerns and warned states not to regulate AI.

Under New York's law, outlawed chatbot behavior with children under 18 includes suggestions that the chatbot is a real person that has emotions, opinions or an actual relationship with the child. It also outlaws chatbot messages that use flattery, involve sexually explicit material or encourage secrecy or unhealthy behavior.

Jim Steyer, founder and CEO of watchdog group Common Sense Media, called New York's law "the strongest kids’ AI safety bill in the country."

Justine Gluck, policy analyst at the Future of Privacy Forum, a nonprofit focused on data protection and AI governance, said the different regulatory approaches by California and New York could be models other states adopt after legislatures reconvene next year.

New York's law, she said, underscores how quickly chatbot regulation is evolving, as states move beyond basic disclosures and crisis-response protocols to regulating the underlying design and operation of chatbots.

Still, several categories in New York's law are broadly worded or undefined, Gluck said.

That raises questions, she said, about “where ordinary conversational responsiveness ends and prohibited behavior begins,” and could complicate how it is enforced.

This article was written by Marc Levy of the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 29, 2026 – The Federal Communications Commission unanimously voted Thursday to block Chinese labs from its wireless device certification program.

Those labs tested more than 82 percent of the new devices approved for sale in the U.S. in 2025, according to agency data. 

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

“Bad labs, as we call them, could use this privileged position to allow insecure gear into the U.S. market, disrupt communications networks, or even steal intellectual property,” FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said at the agency’s open meeting.

The FCC has to clear new models of electronics for import into the U.S., and relies on tests done by certification labs to ensure devices follow spectrum rules and other standards.

The ban would kick in on Dec. 1, 2028, unless China signed an agreement to recognize U.S.-based test labs. After that date, the FCC would only allow labs in the U.S. or countries that had signed such an agreement to participate in its device authorization program.

Scepticism of Chinese test labs has been a point of bipartisan agreement at the FCC. Under the Biden administration the FCC discovered Chinese firm Huawei, whose telecom gear was banned in the U.S., was operating a test lab and began looking into other labs, Carr said.

Last year the FCC moved to block test labs controlled by the Chinese government and other foreign adversaries and has formally removed 32 labs under the rule. FCC engineer Thomas Rigolage said at the agency meeting that the FCC recently discovered four labs recycling identical test results.

On a call with reporters last month, a senior FCC official said the agency had received some interest from countries about signing new reciprocal testing agreements, without specifically naming China. 

Tech companies have told the agency it would be a bad idea to reduce testing capacity so severely. FCC Commissioners Olivia Trusty and Anna Gomez defended the two-year transition period as a reasonable amount of time for manufacturers to adjust.

The FCC additionally advanced a slate of spectrum items Thrusday at its October meeting.

Rural Broadband Protection Act

The agency also advanced a proposal to implement the Rural Broadband Protection Act. The law, led by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W. Va., required the agency to stand up vetting for new recipients of funding under the FCC’s High Cost program.

The agency proposed to set the specifics of vetting processes when new subsidy programs were adopted. It will also ask whether the FCC’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund process was sufficient and how to update it if not.

“After all, given what happened in RDOF, the question deserves a full record,” Gomez said. “I encourage everyone with experience in these programs to tell us what works and what doesn’t.”

The agency caught some heat in the wake of RDOF bidding, as more granular vetting of applicants wasn’t done until after bids had been awarded, and some companies failed at that stage and stranded large numbers of locations.

Carr and Gomez, the agency’s lone Democrat, did not trade any jabs about SpaceX’s participation in RDOF. The company won a tentative award of nearly $900 million before failing the more in-depth agency review.

The agency found it wasn’t clear in 2022 that SpaceX’s satellite broadband service would meet the program’s minimum standards. Carr, a commissioner at the time, opposed the denial, saying the company had shown evidence it could ramp up its speeds.

Cross-border infrastructure

The agency also approved an order that will increase reporting requirements from companies that provide communications services across the U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada borders.

“By ensuring that we have visibility into these facilities, we help to seal off our borders from foreign intrusion into our networks,” Carr said. 

The item will also seek comment on a proposal to block entities controlled by foreign adversaries from providing gear or connecting to those networks.

Lifeline violation

The agency also unanimously approved a notice of apparent liability, the first step in issuing a fine, for $4.4 million against Boomerang Wireless.

The company allegedly enrolled 442 dead subscribers in the FCC’s Lifeline program, which provides telecom discounts to low-income households, and received $7,000 in reimbursements for those subscribers.

It was one of an initial group of companies the FCC said it was investigating in February, agency staff said. 

The companies operated in California, Texas, and Oregon, states that allow companies to use third-party identity verification services rather than the federal system used by other states. Boomerang’s website says it operates in all three opt-out states.

The company denied any wrongdoing.

“Boomerang has in every instance relied on the FCC’s prescribed third-party eligibility verification processes. The FCC’s rules require it to do so,” a Boomerang spokesperson said in an email. “The company intends to defend itself vigorously against the FCC’s misguided NAL.”

The spokesperson claimed the company also independently checked another federal database that showed the subscribers were alive at the time of enrollment.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 29, 2026 – The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously Thursday to seek input on a plan to make more spectrum available for direct-to-device service.

It was one of multiple spectrum efforts adopted during a busy FCC meeting, including advancing a new spectrum auction and allowing drones to use a mobile spectrum band.

Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!

Don't Miss Out!

The direct-to-device item proposed adding more than 480 megahertz to the FCC’s supplemental coverage from space (SCS) framework, which allows satellite companies to lease spectrum owned by terrestrial carriers, and overhauling some SCS requirements.

The agency did not act on a last-minute request from SpaceX to tweak the proposal, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Chief Joel Taubenblatt said at the agency’s press conference. 

The company had wanted the agency to include spectrum covered by the pending NextNav petition in its inquiry. NextNav wants to use some of the lower 900 MegaHertz (MHz) band for a GPS backup and 5G broadband, an effort that has been met with strong opposition from other users of the band. 

SpaceX has expressed interest in using the airwaves for direct-to-device if that ends up being allowed. 

The agency was more receptive to concerns from the national wireless carriers.

The carriers said the 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz bands, used by T-Mobile and AT&T, were bad candidates for direct-to-device because it would be almost impossible to prevent interference. The bands use time-division duplexing (TDD), meaning the same channels are used for uplink and downlink at different times, and satellites are so far away that they couldn’t properly keep in sync with towers on the ground, the companies argued.

“We adjusted how we’re seeking comment on bands that can be used for TDD,” Taubenblatt said. “There were a number of concerns that were raised in the record on some of the technical challenges there.”

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said that the 2024 SCS framework needed updating given the vastly increased interest from satellite companies in providing direct-to-device mobile service.

The item would propose to allow SCS leases in customer licenses areas, rather than the current nationwide framework, and would allow satellite companies to acquire the underlying spectrum licenses themselves. Under the current framework, satellite companies can use terrestrial mobile spectrum for direct-to-device if they lease it from carriers.

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, the agency’s lone Democrat, said she didn’t want the framework to allow one or two companies to dominate the direct-to-device market. She wasn’t opposed to the plan and voted in favor of it.

Gomez said she had been thinking lately about a spectrum screen for satellite spectrum, something she said she was able to convince Carr’s office to ask about in the adopted item. 

The agency scrutinizes spectrum ownership in certain markets to prevent over consolidation, and something similar might be appropriate given the hugely increased demand for direct-to-device spectrum and the early stages of the market. 

Spectrum auction

The FCC also unanimously advanced a proposal to hold an auction in the 1675-1695 MHz and 2020-2025 MHz bands.

“We expect big interest in this seemingly modest amount of spectrum,” Carr said.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration is studying the 1675-1695 MHz band to confirm it can all be opened up for commercial use. It’s used in part by the government to transmit meteorological data from weather balloons.

Carr said NTIA would likely be finished with that study by early 2027, and that the results would inform the FCC’s ultimate approach.

NTIA already identified 5 megaherts from 1675-1680 MHz for auction, and is hoping to tap the rest of the band.

NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth said in a statement that the band "offers exciting opportunities and flexibility to power satellite direct-to-device and terrestrial mobile operations," and that NTIA was "leading the work to identify the remaining spectrum in the band in the coming months" as part of its work under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

The FCC is hoping to make the spectrum usable for terrestrial or direct-to-device mobile service, or a combination of the two.

Gomez said there were still “important technical questions” on whether satellite and terrestrial users could coexist in the bands.

Taubenblatt said the only significant change from the public draft of the item was additional questions on coexistence with users in adjacent spectrum bands. Gomez said the item would also ask about a satellite spectrum screen, and a Tribal licensing window.

Drone spectrum

The agency adopted an order allowing drones to use nearly 50 megahertz in the 800 MHz band.

It was one of the first bands allocated for mobile use in the U.S., and its rules prevented airborne use. Under the FCC’s order, wireless providers can offer drone services using the band.

“Virtually all drones need access to spectrum, whether to deliver video or data back to the ground, or to support mission-critical safety functions,” Carr said.

Amazon was pleased with the move. Ashleigh de la Torre, the company’s vice president of public policy, said in a statement that demand for drone delivery was growing and extra airwaves would be beneficial.

Update: This story was updated to add additional commentary