A House subcommittee approved Republican-led bills to streamline broadband permitting processes, drawing sharp criticism from local governments as an unprecedented federal intrusion. The measures aim to expedite network deployments amid delays in a $42 billion federal program. Cable industry groups praised the reforms, while Democrats decried them as favoring providers over communities.
On November 18, 2025, the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology advanced a package of bills to overhaul local permitting for broadband infrastructure. The Republican initiative seeks to impose federal deadlines on municipalities, automatically approving certain telecom projects if local governments fail to decide within set periods ranging from 60 to 150 days. One bill requires permit fees for Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) projects to reflect only actual direct costs, while another exempts some environmental and historical reviews for equipment removal under a 2019 security law.
Local leaders strongly opposed the plan. In a letter to lawmakers, the United States Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, and National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors called the bills an “unprecedented federal intrusion into established local decision-making processes, favoring large broadband, telecommunications, wireless, and cable companies at the expense of residents and taxpayers.” They argued the measures would preempt local authority over public rights-of-way and land use, stripping communities of tools to manage infrastructure.
Democrats echoed these concerns. Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) described the package as “full of bad ideas that are unpopular with members on both sides of the aisle,” noting opposition from local officials to arbitrary deadlines that could lead to automatic approvals. Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), the subcommittee's top Democrat, criticized the tight timelines without additional resources, saying they “cut out community input, leads to mistakes and sets us up for more delays down the road.” She accused Republicans of “cherry picking stories about slow permits to justify steamrolling local voices,” and her amendment to aid BEAD implementation was rejected.
Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) defended the bills, stating they would “add much-needed certainty, predictability, and accountability to the broadband permitting process and help expedite deployment.” The debate highlighted delays in the $42 billion BEAD program, created in 2021 to expand access in unserved areas. The Trump administration discarded a Biden-era distribution plan, prompting states to revise proposals; on the hearing day, it approved plans for 18 states and territories, though no funds have been disbursed yet. Hudson blamed “four years of delays caused by the Biden-Harris administration,” while Pallone countered that Republicans had connected “not a single household” nearly a year into their term.
Cable lobbyists welcomed the moves. NCTA hailed the hearing as “important progress” toward removing “regulatory impediments that slow deployment to unserved areas.” America's Communications Association said the bills would “strip away red tape” to upgrade rural networks. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr praised the reforms for unleashing infrastructure builds and cutting costs. Not all bills were controversial; Pallone supported six bipartisan measures addressing federal agency delays, such as updating systems and standardizing fees.
The approved bills now head to the full Commerce Committee.