California regulators are locked in a fierce battle with AT&T over state residents' access to life-saving emergency communications.  

Officials have accused the telecom giant of actively misleading the public as the state considers stricter rules to make wireless coverage maps more accurate, and providers more accountable for reliability failures.

At the heart of the standoff is California’s Carrier Of Last Resort (COLR) obligations, which mandate that state residents have reliable access to voice calls, 911, deaf and disabled assistance services, customer service support, protection from unwanted charges, and flexible billing options.

AT&T lobbyists have worked tirelessly to eliminate such requirements in 20 of its 21 state service territories, falsely claiming the regulations stifled the company’s ability to install next-generation fiber. In reality, AT&T has long been criticized for cheaping out on fiber investments, and is primarily interested in eliminating already dwindling oversight.

Image

In many areas, AT&T has refused to upgrade aging DSL infrastructure, instead shoveling California residents off to “good enough” wireless service. But AT&T’s wireless service isn’t consistently available, affordable, or reliable – particularly when it comes to providing Californians dependable access to essential 911 infrastructure.

Despite this, more than 80 percent of 911 calls in California are now placed from a wireless device. CPUC data also shows that of the more than 1,000 recent wireless service outages in California, many lasted longer than 24 hours, including 359 that lasted longer than 72 hours.

California residents are engaged in a protracted, ugly battle with telecom giant AT&T over their ability to receive life-saving communications during an emergency. 

The battle comes as the telecom monopoly attempts to eliminate most meaningful oversight of the company’s communications networks, actively putting human lives – and state rights – at risk.

At the heart of the standoff is California’s Carrier Of Last Resort (COLR) obligations, which mandate that state residents maintain reliable access to voice calls, 911, toll free calls, deaf and disabled assistance services, customer service support, protection from unwanted charges, operator services, directory help, and flexible billing options.

AT&T lobbyists have worked tirelessly to eliminate such requirements in 20 of its 21 state service territories, falsely claiming the regulations stifled the company’s ability to install next-generation fiber access. In reality, AT&T has long been criticized for cheaping out on fiber investments, and is primarily interested in eliminating any dwindling oversight.

As COLR obligations are eliminated, customers are frequently shoveled from traditional copper-based landlines – which operate even during power outages – to frequently less reliable and significantly more expensive wireless alternatives. In many cases that results in California elderly residents losing access to essential lifesaving services entirely, particularly in areas where cellular connectivity is spotty or unavailable.

In the last few years, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has been more intensely focused on ensuring that broadband in California is affordable. 

So it’s curious to see the California State Assembly vote 67-1 on May 18 to strip telecom oversight authority away from the CPUC and shift it to a more easily lobbied state legislature – and an as-yet-undefined state broadband office.

The effort still has a long road before it’s formalized.

Assembly Constitutional Amendment 9, authored by Assemblymember Tasha Boerner, D-Encinitas, now moves on to the California Senate, where it needs to secure a two-thirds vote before appearing on a statewide ballot before California voters.

Image

The proposal would remove the state constitutional requirement to define and regulate telecommunications as a public utility, something long supported by telecom giants. Boerner’s amendment (and companion bill AB 2289) gives lawmakers leeway to strip the CPUC of its telecom portfolio and hand it over to a newly created state broadband office by 2028.

Consumer Advocates Are 'Shocked' and Skeptical 

Boerner’s proposal is being sold to state lawmakers and the local press as a way to keep the CPUC focused on soaring electrical costs.

The Illinois Legislature has taken several major legal steps to not only improve broadband affordability in The Prairie State, but empower local cooperatives to expand affordable, reliable fiber access to state residents long trapped on the wrong side of the digital divide.

Illinois State Sen. Rachel Ventura (D-Joliet) recently introduced Senate Bill 3612, which would amend the state’s Utilities Act to require that large private telecoms in the state provide affordable, fast broadband access to low-income state residents.

More specifically the updated law, which would take effect at the beginning of 2027, would require ISPs to provide minimum broadband download speeds of 25 megabits per second (Mbps) for no more than $15 per month and $20 per month for high-speed service of at least 200 Mbps, including all recurring taxes and equipment fees, to qualifying households.

As with other proposals of its kind, recipients would need to already participate in existing low-income assistant programs.

“Investments in broadband are essential for all Illinoisans, regardless of whether they live in a rural, suburban or urban community,” Ventura said of the proposal. “We’ve entered a new age where broadband is no longer a luxury, but an essential amenity, driving economic activity, improving education, expanding health care access and enhancing public services for all.”

Innovative digital equity nonprofit DigitalC has been working for years to shore up affordable broadband access in underserved cities like Cleveland, Ohio. 

Now the organization is enjoying new momentum for its plans to expand fixed wireless broadband access in the city thanks to a $500,000 cash infusion from tech giant Google. According to a recent announcement, the donation includes next-generation Fixed Wireless Access (ngFWA) equipment from Tarana, which will allow DigitalC to expand its Canopy home broadband service – which provides symmetrical 100 megabit per second (Mbps) at $18 a month – to even more neighborhoods in Ohio.

The nonprofit just celebrated the connection of its 6,000th household in Cleveland, a city once ranked the worst-connected large city in the U.S. by the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA).

Image

“This meaningful investment from GFiber adds bandwidth to our capacity to scale the Cleveland Model,” DigitalC CEO Joshua Edmonds said of the cash infusion. “This community-based blueprint proves that next-generation technology can be deployed quickly, trusted deeply, and scaled effectively to deliver the superior internet experience more communities deserve.”

The Trump FCC has voted to kill two different programs that helped bring free Wi-Fi to school kids in underserved poor and rural U.S. communities.

It’s the latest casualty of an administration that has been taking a hatchet to FCC consumer protection and affordability initiatives, many of which were developed over decades – with popular bipartisan support.

The FCC under Brendan Carr on September 30 voted 2-1 to kill the programs, with Republican Olivia Trusty voting with Carr and Democrat Anna Gomez dissenting.

In 2023, the previous FCC expanded the agency’s Universal Service Fund's E-Rate program to help fund free Wi-Fi service on school buses. In 2024, the Biden FCC further expanded the program to help fund schools and libraries looking to lend out Wi-Fi hotspots and services that could be used off-premises by school kids that lacked affordable home broadband.

Both efforts were lauded for bridging the “homework gap,” making it easier and more affordable for kids in disconnected areas to keep up with homework. The expansions incurred no additional costs to taxpayers, leveraging existing USF funding. E-Rate spends about $2 billion annually and has a funding cap of roughly $5 billion.

Both Texas Senator Ted Cruz and FCC Chairman Brendan Carr spent most of 2025 trying to eliminate the programs. At one point, Cruz claimed, falsely, that the program was “censoring kids’ exposure to conservative viewpoints.” Carr, meanwhile, had tried to suggest the program created risks for kids due to unsupervised Internet use.