WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats will spend billions of dollars and countless hours campaigning throughout the country ahead of November’s midterm elections, even though control of Congress likely will be decided by a relatively small number of toss-up races and the voters who actually turn out to cast a ballot for their preferred candidate.

There are just four Senate races out of 35 and 18 House districts out of 435 where each candidate has even odds of winning, according to analysis from The Cook Political Report with Amy Walter. The rest are categorized as leaning, likely or solidly for one party or the other. Some ratings potentially will still shift in a turbulent election year. 

When combined with the generally low turnout for midterm elections, which only topped 50% once during the last century, an especially narrow margin of Americans could determine whether President Donald Trump and Republicans retain their trifecta political control of Washington for the last two years of Trump’s term.

A Senate flip from Republican to Democratic control would have sweeping impacts, including which nominees for vacancies in the Trump administration, federal judgeships and any openings on the Supreme Court are confirmed. 

A House shift from red to blue would likely determine whether Trump and possibly members of his Cabinet face impeachment proceedings in that chamber. 

The most likely outcome experts see at this early stage is for Republicans to lose the House and keep the Senate, possibly with a slimmer majority in the upper chamber. However, that could change in the months ahead as primary election results determine which candidates advance to the November general elections. 

The first primaries are scheduled for March 3 and roll through September, with 16 in June alone.

Highly publicized efforts by several Republican and Democratic state legislatures to redraw the boundaries of their U.S. House seats could also be a variable. But, so far, neither party has gained any real advantage, according to analysis from Erin Covey, Cook Political Report’s editor for the House.

“While it’s not clear how many states will have new maps in 2026, we project that the likeliest scenario is a wash, with neither party netting seats due to redistricting,” she wrote. 

The stakes will be high for the handful of competitive general election races and the attention there will be intense. Leaders from both political parties, as well as outside groups, are likely to focus their spending and campaign ads on those relatively few contests and voters that will determine control of Congress. 

Trump impeachment fears

Trump has repeatedly lamented the historic norm that a president’s party tends to lose seats during the midterms, including in January when he addressed House Republicans at the Kennedy Center.  

“Whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat, whoever wins the presidency, the other party wins the midterm,” he said. “And it doesn’t make sense because … we’ve had the most successful first year of any president in history.”

Trump also warned that if Republicans lose the House, he’ll face impeachment proceedings for the third time. He was impeached twice during his first administration.

“You got to win the midterms because if we don’t win the midterms, it’s just going to be, I mean, they’ll find a reason to impeach me,” he said. “I’ll get impeached.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., are confident GOP candidates will win enough races to ensure they maintain control over what bills come to the floor and which are held back from debate. 

“I think they’re going to give it to the grown-ups,” Johnson said during a press conference in early February. “I think the Republicans will be able to continue and grow our majority to keep governing.” 

Johnson said during a separate press conference he believes Americans should have confidence in the results of the midterm elections, but pressed for the Senate to pass a new, nationwide voter ID requirement that House lawmakers recently approved.

“I think we can trust the outcome of the election but what I will tell you is there is still a great concern that in certain pockets of the country that there’s not strict enforcement of the laws,” Johnson said. 

It is illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and anyone found guilty could face fines and up to a year in prison. There are limited instances of people not eligible to vote actually casting a ballot, according to analysis from the Bipartisan Policy Center of data compiled by the Heritage Foundation, an especially conservative think tank. 

BPC’s examination “found only 77 instances of noncitizens voting between 1999 and 2023” and that “there is no evidence that noncitizen voting has ever been significant enough to impact an election’s outcome.”

Democrats battle for control

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both from New York, are equally as confident as their GOP counterparts that Democrats will regain power, though primary elections are a factor.  

Jeffries said during a mid-February press conference he supports every single House Democrat seeking reelection, calling primaries “a reality” of the country’s political system while also taking a swipe at the Senate. 

“Every two years we have to go back to the people to make an argument, to persuade them to renew our two-year employment contract. That’s just a way of life,” he said. “It must be nice to have a six-year term. But we don’t have the luxury, so that’s going to mean in many districts across the country that there will be active primaries.”

Democrats need to pick up four more Senate seats to retake control of that chamber, particularly long odds given this year’s map. 

The Cook Political Report classifies Senate races in Georgia, Maine, Michigan and North Carolina as toss-ups, giving Democrats two possible additions if they can hold onto the open seat in the Wolverine State and Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia secures reelection. 

The open New Hampshire seat leans toward remaining in the hands of a Democrat, while Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan and Ohio Sen. Jon Husted’s seats lean toward those Republicans securing reelection. 

The open Minnesota seat will likely remain blue, the report forecasts. The open Iowa seat and Texas are likely to stay Republican. The remainder of the Senate campaigns are rated as solid for Democrats or Republicans. 

Besides the 18 House seats categorized as toss-ups by Cook, another 14 lean toward Democrats and four lean toward Republicans. That means just 8% of House races are truly or somewhat competitive, though that is likely to fluctuate after the primaries determine which candidates advance to the general election. 

The GOP holds a very thin 218-214 House majority, with three vacancies, making even a few Republican losses highly problematic for that party’s leadership team and beneficial for Democrats. 

‘Even a few seats might make a difference’

Timothy M. Hagle, associate professor of political science at the University of Iowa, said during midterm elections “the party that’s not in control of the White House usually does pretty well, picks up some seats and so forth.

“And so, given how closely divided the U.S. House and Senate are, even a few seats might make a difference.”

Hagle said people who don’t feel strongly about one political party or another, often referred to as independent or swing voters, will expect candidates to provide solutions for “kitchen table issues,” like jobs, health care and the cost of living. 

“You’ve got to reach beyond your base if you expect to win an election,” he said.

But Hagle noted it’s increasingly difficult for politicians to convince people to vote, even as the internet and social media have become woven into everyday life, giving candidates a better chance to have their messages heard directly. 

Voter turnout data from the University of Florida Election Lab shows fewer than half of eligible voters cast ballots in midterm elections during the last century, with the exception of 2018, when it reached a peak of 50.1%. 

“And one aspect of this that’s a little more on the modern side is that our politics today is so partisan, it’s hyper-partisan, and I think it has turned a lot of people off,” Hagle said. “And so they really just don’t want to get involved in it.”

When that’s rolled in with mid-cycle redistricting in several states and the longer term decline in competitive seats due to gerrymandering, Hagle said, it’s led some politicians to change how they communicate with voters. 

“You do see attempts by the parties to talk about … things they’ve accomplished,” he said. “Republicans are in control, so they have to do this. And Democrats will say, ‘Well, here’s sort of what we want to do.’ But one problem there is that it’s often easier to motivate people through fear.”

“In other words, if a party is doing a good job, people will say, ‘Okay, good. That’s sort of what you were hired to do. So keep at it.’ Whereas if you say, ‘Oh, this party, if you leave them in control or put them in control, they’re going to do these horrible things.’ That tends to motivate,” Hagle added. “And that’s one of the reasons why you see such toxic messaging.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans, Democrats and the White House are methodically, calmly inching toward a common goal: agreeing on a thick package of laws that would do something quickly about slowing housing costs and boosting supply.

There’s no talk of gridlock here. No partisan sniping. Just an under the radar effort to show constituents in an election year that their lawmakers realize there’s a big problem when it comes to buying homes.

That’s why the House earlier this month passed its version of housing reform with only nine dissenting votes. The Senate committee writing similar legislation approved it unanimously last year.

While there are still some obstacles ahead before anything reaches President Donald Trump’s desk, what’s happening is almost a throwback to the days when getting 80% of one’s plan was a big victory, a policy prize to tout back home as midterm elections near.

“There is no silver bullet for fixing this problem,” said Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., chairman of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee. 

But, he added, “I think that this bill, this legislation, includes a range of meaningful housing reforms that will add to housing supply and ultimately decrease housing costs.”

Housing shortage 

The House and Senate bills have a common purpose, said Emma Waters, senior policy analyst at Washington’s Bipartisan Policy Center. “Both bills really are pushing to make it easier to build more affordable homes,” she said. 

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., a member of the House Financial Services Committee, explained the House bill this way: “It ensures that every dollar we do spend goes further.”

An analysis by the Zillow Group, a real estate company that researches home prices and trends, last summer found that in 2023, about 1.4 million new homes were added to the housing stock, but there were 1.8 million newly formed families.

As a result, the housing shortage was up to 4.7 million units. Other estimates put it as high as 7 million.

The typical home price in January in the United States was $359,078, up 0.2% from a year earlier, Zillow found. Prices depend on a wide variety of factors, including labor costs, cost of materials, interest rates, supply and demand and more.

What government can do

The congressional legislation tries to help ease supply and stabilize prices as much as the government can at this point. 

The House and Senate bills share several similar provisions. The  Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based research organization, estimated that the House bill includes pieces of at least 43 different House or Senate bills, 27 of which have had bipartisan support.

Under the House plan, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development would update the department’s construction standards for manufactured housing. The Senate bill has similar provisions.

Rep. John Rose, R-Tenn., a housing subcommittee member, explained the problem: “Municipalities across the country have restricted or outright banned homes built on permanent steel chassis. The result has been less construction, higher costs, and fewer opportunities for working families to own where they live.”

The House bill would provide money for “pattern books” for such housing that would feature pre-approved plans that could speed up the approval process.

The legislation would also provide “a lot of provisions to make it easier for state and local governments to reduce regulatory barriers,” said Waters.

The bills would allow money from Community Development Block Grants, which help fund neighborhood projects, to better support housing production.

The Senate bill would reward CDBG recipients that have, unrelated to their other CDBG projects, increased their housing production in the previous year. 

As a reward for building more housing in the previous year, those jurisdictions would receive additional CDBG funding, but there are still restrictions on how those funds can be used. 

The House bill, though, would change the restriction so that CDBG money could be used for housing construction.

Help for consumers

Housing experts believe a reason landlords balk is they’re reluctant to endure the government’s inspection process; the bills would streamline that process. Landlords would get incentives to accept tenants with rent vouchers.

The HOME Investment Partnerships Program, which aids state and local efforts to provide housing for lower income families, would also get a makeover of sorts in the bills. 

For instance, the House bill says environmental impact statements would no longer be needed for many projects, and it would be easier to tap money from the HOME budget.

Also likely to help consumers: making it easier for banks, usually community institutions that focus on local needs, to invest in more affordable housing. The House bill would raise the public investment welfare cap, allowing more such investments.

Rep. French Hill, R-Ark., was enthusiastic about this provision. “Our bill helps banks access stable deposit funding, streamlines the exam process that’s tailored particularly for our vital community banks, and helps promote more community banks to do what they do best, lend locally and support their communities,” said Hill, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, in a statement.

What’s ahead 

The banking provision is one of the few major areas where the Senate and House disagree. There’s concern among some Democrats that the House bill lifts too many bank regulatory barriers.

“We have a bipartisan bill with unanimous support in the Senate that will help build more housing and lower costs for the American people. I’m glad to see the House move forward on housing proposals,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

But, she said, “House Republicans should not hold housing relief hostage to push forward several bank deregulatory bills that will make our community banks more fragile while harming consumers, small businesses, and economic growth.”

Also having potential to stymie negotiations is the White House’s eagerness to ban institutional investors from buying single family homes. There’s not much congressional support for that idea.

Trump last month issued an executive order telling “key agencies to issue guidance preventing relevant Federal programs from approving, insuring, guaranteeing, securitizing, or facilitating sales of single-family homes to institutional investors.”

Staying upbeat

There’s still a sense in the Capitol that Republicans and Democrats will come together on a major housing bill, particularly since Congress and the White House agree on most key provisions and leading interest groups are helping push legislation forward.

The National Association of Realtors has been enthusiastic about the House and Senate bills. 

 “By addressing barriers at every level of government, the legislation will make it faster and cheaper to build new homes,” the organization said after the House passed the housing reform  bill. The Realtors had similar praise for the Senate version.

The Affordable Housing Tax Credit Coalition also liked the House bill, as CEO Emily Cadik called it “a set of common sense, bipartisan housing proposals that would increase the supply of affordable housing.”

Most in Washington who follow housing policy closely are upbeat about the legislation’s prospects.

“It’s all pretty positive stuff,” said Waters.

Two years ago, Republican Paul Wassgren was involved in a $44 million settlement ending a class action lawsuit in which investors alleged the Florida-based company Wassgren represented orchestrated a "Ponzi scheme" that raised more than $170 million.

The post Wisconsin GOP congressional candidate named in $44M settlement of alleged ‘Ponzi scheme’ lawsuit appeared first on WPR.

Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin said Friday she adamantly opposes a GOP bill moving through Congress that would tighten voting access nationwide.

The post Wisconsin US Sen. Tammy Baldwin speaks out against GOP bill to restrict voting appeared first on WPR.

Eau Claire Democrat Rebecca Cooke has outraised Republican Congressman Derrick Van Orden for the first time in Wisconsin's hotly contested 3rd Congressional District race.

The post Democratic challenger Rebecca Cooke outraises US Rep. Derrick Van Orden appeared first on WPR.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A broad coalition of trade groups representing ethanol producers, petroleum refiners, farmers, and retailers sent a letter to the co-chairs of the new E15 Rural Domestic Energy Council calling for swift action to deliver lower prices for consumers and a stable, efficient fuels marketplace. The letter outlines recommendations for consensus legislation to permit year-round, nationwide sales of E15 and improve long-term policy certainty across the transportation fuel sector.

“[T]he time window for arriving at a recommended legislative solution is short, with the council expected to submit legislative solutions to the full House by February 15th, only 16 days from today. We applaud this expedited time frame as fuel producers and retailers are making decisions now about product offerings over the next year, farmers are making planting decisions, and a legislative fix is needed as soon as possible to provide fuel producers and retailers with a predictable policy framework as we approach the summer driving season,” the organizations wrote.

To “achieve a solution in short order,” the groups urged lawmakers to build upon H.R. 1346, the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, that was amended and offered for consideration by Representative Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) last week before the Rules Committee. These include fixing outdated regulations on summer sales of E15 and limiting the marketplace distortions caused by Small Refiner Exemptions (SRE) under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).

“H.R. 1346 has broad support from the overwhelming majority of biofuels, agriculture, fuel retail, and oil refining interests, and is the most comprehensive pathway to a legislative solution,” the organizations wrote.

Signatories on the letter included the Agriculture Retailers Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, American Petroleum Institute, Corn Refiners Association, Growth Energy, National Association of Convenience Stores, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, NATSO, National Corn Growers Association, National Sorghum Producers, Renewable Fuels Association, and SIGMA.

Full text of the letter can be found at GrowthEnergy.org.

The post Broad Coalition of Farm and Fuel Leaders Rally Behind Immediate E15 Fix appeared first on Growth Energy.

Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin says U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem "needs to be fired or resign" following the fatal shooting of two Minnesota residents by federal immigration agents.

The post Tammy Baldwin says Kristi Noem should be fired over fatal shootings by federal agents appeared first on WPR.

Federal agents stage at a front gate as Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar, Kelly Morrison and Angie Craig of Minnesota attempt to enter the regional ICE headquarters at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building on Jan. 10, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON —  U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb Wednesday probed whether the Trump administration has violated her court order, after Minnesota lawmakers said they were denied an oversight visit to a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility following a deadly shooting by an immigration officer in Minneapolis. 

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar, Angie Craig and Kelly Morrison of Minnesota said they were denied entry to the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis last weekend. 

An attorney representing the lawmakers, Christine L. Coogle, asked Cobb to make it clear to the Trump administration that her stay order is in place. 

Last month, Cobb issued a temporary block on a policy by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem that required seven days notice for lawmakers to conduct oversight visits at ICE facilities.

Cobb found Noem violated a 2019 appropriations law, referred to as Section 527, that allows for unannounced oversight visits at facilities that hold immigrants. 

“If the government is using 527 funds to exclude members of Congress from (ICE) facilities, that does run afoul of my order,” Cobb said during Wednesday’s hearing.

Dems eye DHS funding 

As the Trump administration has carried out an aggressive immigration campaign, and with Democrats the minority party in both chambers of Congress, unannounced oversight visits to ICE facilities are one of the few tools Democrats can use. The other way they could try to counter the enforcement push is through appropriations to the Department of Homeland Security.

For example, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is made up of nearly 100 Democrats, vowed on Tuesday to vote against any DHS appropriations bill unless major changes are made at ICE regarding immigration enforcement.

Separately, Democrats on Wednesday introduced articles of impeachment against Noem. One count is connected to the denial of oversight visits. 

New Noem policy after Renee Good killing

One day after federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross killed 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis, Noem issued a new memo for members of Congress who want to conduct oversight visits at ICE facilities. 

She required a seven-day notice, nearly identical to the policy that initially prompted the suit from Democrats last year.

Noem argued in her new policy that because those federal ICE facilities are using funds through the spending and tax cuts package, and not the DHS appropriations bill, they are therefore exempt from unannounced oversight visits by members of Congress. 

In an emergency request, Democrats argued the funds DHS is using apply under Section 527, and DHS is violating Cobb’s stay.

Cobb said on Wednesday she could not make a determination if her order was violated until she can get a clear answer from the Trump administration as to the source of the funds. She directed Department of Justice lawyers to determine what it is.

Funding stream question

In court filings, DOJ argued the facilities are funded through the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act” passed and signed into law last year, and that DHS does not need to comply with Section 527.

The OBBBA, passed through a congressional process called reconciliation, is allowed to adjust federal spending even though it is not an appropriations law.

Coogle said until OBBAA, the only funding for ICE came from appropriations, and argued the two funding streams can’t be separated. She said the Trump administration is trying to “make a game here” with appropriations law.

“Appropriations are not a game. They are the law,” Coogle said.  

The House Democrats who sued include Joe Neguse of Colorado, Adriano Espaillat of New York, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Robert Garcia of California, J. Luis Correa of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Dan Goldman of New York, Jimmy Gomez of California, Raul Ruiz of California, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi and Norma Torres of California.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on May 8, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — U.S. House Democrats Wednesday introduced three articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, after a deadly shooting of a woman in Minneapolis by a federal immigration officer.

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment. 

The three articles of impeachment were introduced by Illinois Democratic Rep. Robin Kelly. Nearly 70 Democrats have co-signed, but as the minority party in both chambers, any support or movement for the articles will likely only occur if Democrats win the midterm elections and flip the House. 

“She needs to be held accountable for her actions,” Kelly said. “Renee Nicole Good is dead because Secretary Noem allowed her DHS agents to run amok.”

On Jan. 7, 37-year-old Renee Good was shot and killed by federal immigration officer Jonathan Ross in Minneapolis. Federal immigration officers have intensified immigration enforcement, leading to massive pushback from the community there and protests across the country. 

The articles from Kelly accuse Noem of obstructing Congress after lawmakers were denied oversight visits at DHS facilities that hold immigrants; violating public trust through due process violations of U.S. citizens’ and immigrants’ rights and aggressive warrantless arrests in immigration enforcement; and misusing $200 million in taxpayer funds by awarding a contract to a company run by the husband of DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, according to ProPublica.

A dozen members of Congress have sued Noem over those denied visits at ICE facilities to conduct oversight and were granted a stay to that policy by a federal judge. But Noem issued a new policy and last weekend several Minnesota lawmakers were blocked from visits to ICE facilities. 

A federal judge is currently probing to see if the new policy from Noem violates her court order from December. 

Kelly was joined by several Democrats, including Minnesota’s Angie Craig, who represents a swing district. 

“We are being terrorized by Homeland Security and ICE,” Craig said. “This has crossed a line. This rogue agency is violating the rights of American citizens in our communities, and last Wednesday … the escalation by ICE in our communities got Renee Good killed.”

Noem would not be the only Homeland Secretary to be impeached, should the House take that action. 

In 2024, Republicans impeached the Biden administration’s DHS secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, on the grounds that he lied to Congress that the southern border was secure and that he violated his duty when he rolled back several Trump-era immigration policies. 

The Senate, then controlled by Democrats, dismissed the articles of impeachment. 

Tribal utility, localities, and consumer and environmental groups argue tax guidance illegally hurts renewable energy. WASHINGTON, D.C. (Dec. 18, 2025) – A broad array of groups with strong interests in clean and affordable energy sued the IRS and Treasury Department over new rules for tax credits that unfairly and illegally discriminate against wind and solar …

The post IRS Sued Over Anti-Solar and Wind Tax Rules appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

As expected, the Federal Communications Commission voted 2-1 to end E-Rate eligibility of school bus Wi-Fi as well as other off-campus internet hotspots.

The declaratory ruling approved Tuesday finds Wi-Fi is now ineligible for E-Rate funding for pending fiscal year 2025 reimbursement requests because two of three FCC commissioners “determined that the best reading of section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, is that the use and provision of these services on school buses does not serve an educational purpose as defined by E-Rate program rules and conflicts with the statute’s direction to enhance access to E-Rate-eligible services for classrooms and libraries,” FCC said in a statement.

School Wi-Fi and hotspot experts disagree.

At the urging of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, the open meeting agenda was updated last week to include reconsideration of a 2023 eclaratory ruling “that would align E-Rate eligibility with section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and make school bus Wi-Fi an ineligible expense. FCC also revoked the federal school hotspot program. School bus Wi-Fi and hotspot advocates say the declaratory ruling disproportionately affects low-income and rural students.

Carr expressed his intent earlier this month to end federal reimbursements for school bus Wi-Fi. Normally the FCC seats five commissioners but currently only has three with two vacancies: Carr is joined by fellow Republican Olivia Trusty, who was confirmed by the Senate earlier this year, and Anna Gomez, a Democrat.

Gomez, who was the lone dissenting vote Tuesday, was one of three votes in 2023 to pass then-Chairman Jessica Rosenworcel’s Learning Without Limits, which included the school bus Wi-Fi eligibility. Following a 2024 FCC order to expand the Universal Service program to fund hotspots outside of schools and libraries, school districts were allowed to apply and be selected for reimbursements. Carr was also a commissioner at the time and cast a no vote.

FCC said Tuesday a statement from Gomez was forthcoming. On Sept. 3, she cautioned that millions of students as well as seniors nationwide stand to suffer as “FCC is moving to strip that connectivity away while doing nothing to make broadband more affordable.”

”Their latest proposals will only widen the gap between those with access to modern-day tools and those left behind. We must all fight back against this level of cruelty and indifference by this administration,” she added.

Carr contends the initiative illegally extended the Emergency Connectivity Fund passed by Congress to provide for federal funding of school bus Wi-Fi for neighborhood hotspots during the COVID-19 pandemic and school shutdowns for children needing to access virtual classes and complete homework.

Learning Without Limits intended to “close the homework gap” between areas of the country where students have access to and can afford broadband internet with economically disadvantaged and rural communities that do not or cannot.

Sen. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, is one of the original authors of the E-Rate program.

“Rolling back the FCC’s hotspot rule is a direct attack on students and educators who need Wi-Fi to complete homework assignments, create lesson plans, and connect with each other,” he said in an email to School Transportation News Friday. “This move is short-sighted and cruel. It saves no money and only makes life harder for millions of Americans. We should be expanding connections, not cutting them off, and I will fight to keep every child, family and library online.”

Markey led a letter sent to Carr by Senate Democrats Monday asking him to continue allowing school bus Wi-Fi to be an allowable E-Rate expense. The letter notes that FCC awarded $48 million through E-Rate in fiscal year 2024 for school bus Wi-Fi.

Further frustrating Markey and other school bus Wi-Fi and off-campus hotspot supporters, the FCC only gave one week notice of the meeting agenda change and did not allow for public comment. Joey Wender, executive director of the Schools Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition, said the fate of internet access for students “should not be rushed through,” pointing out school districts nationwide have already made purchasing plans under the assumption federal funding would be available going forward.

“We believe FCC should provide ample notice of any changes and for stakeholders to comment, tell their stories, and share their data,” he added.

Echoing Sen. Ted Cruz, the leading opponent of E-Rate for school bus Wi-Fi and hotspots in Congress, Carr asserts that school bus Wi-Fi and hotspots were never meant to be E-Rate eligible expenses. Advocates argue that Congress left open for interpretation section 254(c)(1) of the Communications Act, reauthorized in 1996 to add Universal Service as the mechanism that funds internet service for schools, libraries and health care providers, the definition of what an elementary school and secondary school, along with libraries, for where Wi-Fi and internet connections can be established and reimbursed.

“Congress deliberately left the term classroom undefined in the Telecommunications Act because it understood that students learn in many different settings, both inside and outside of traditional school buildings,” commented Keith Krueger, executive director of the Consortium for School Networking, or CoSN. “That flexibility has always been a strength of the E-Rate program, allowing it to adapt as learning environments change.”
He also noted the federal law refers to “an evolving level of services.”

“From that perspective, school bus Wi-Fi is consistent with the program’s purpose. It is simply one of the modern settings where students do their work,” he added.

During a keynote address at the 2024 STN EXPO West, Krueger told the audience the FCC estimates between 8.5 million and 16 million school children nationwide lack broadband internet at home.

Wender noted FCC supports internet connectivity reimbursed by E-Rate for administrative offices and book mobiles that extend to parking lots, and school bus Wi-Fi is an even better use-case.

FCC’s Carr and Gomez as well as Sen. Cruz had not responded to questions posed by STN at this report.

But Carr and Cruz have publicly stated that school bus Wi-Fi is poses a safety issue for students using it, with Cruz likening it to TikTok for school children.

However, E-Rate requires all funded communications devices comply with the Child Internet Protection Act. School bus Wi-Fi services must include filters that, in conjunction with closed school district networks, prohibit students from accessing unapproved sites and logs when and where the attempts occur.

In a 2023 announcement of the All Eyes on Board Act to combat FCC voting to allow school bus Wi-Fi, Cruz along with Sens. Senator Ted Budd of North Carolina and Shelley Capito of West Virginia acknowledged CIPA regulations but added “there is currently no provision requiring schools to block access to distracting and addictive social media apps or websites. As a result, the E-Rate program risks inadvertently enabling access to social media in schools,” though state laws do exist requiring the sites be blocked.

---

Related: Trusty Confirmed to FCC as School Bus Wi-Fi Future Hangs in Balance
Related: School Bus Wi-Fi in Flux?
Related: Iowa’s Largest School District Mulls Future of School Bus Wi-Fi Program

---

Earlier this month, Sen. Cruz encouraged the House to pass a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to overturn what he called “the illegal Biden hotspot rule.” In May, he led a similar CRA through the Senate, where it passed to end federal funding of external hotspot devices some school districts send home with their students. But so far, Cruz has not garnered sufficient votes in the House to consolidate and pass a final CRA, which would be needed for President Trump’s signature into law.

Cruz has also said there are existing FCC programs that could fund school bus Wi-Fi, but he has not provided specifics.

Commented Wender, “I cannot speak to the intentions of policy makers. I can only speak to the consequences of ending the [school bus Wi-Fi] program, which is widening the digital divide resulting in low-income kids not being able to do their homework.”

Still, there’s hope, he said. Wender called FCC action “the lesser of two evils” because a future commission could reverse a decision and reinstate E-Rate reimbursement. The passage of a CRA would be more permanent.

The post Update: FCC Revokes E-Rate Eligibility of School Bus Wi-Fi appeared first on School Transportation News.

New Poll: American Voters Support Federal Investments in Electric Vehicles Broad, Bipartisan Support for EV Investments and Incentives that Lower Costs, Expand Access, and Help the U.S. Beat China in the Race for Auto Manufacturing WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new bipartisan national poll conducted by Meeting Street Insights and Hart Research finds broad public support …

The post Support for Electric Vehicles appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Feb. 7, 2025) – Late yesterday, the Federal Highway Administration?halted?new funding for state programs to install tens of thousands of new vehicle chargers along highways and at rest stops across the nation. A key part of the 2022 bipartisan infrastructure law, all 50 states have federally approved plans to build these fast chargers, …

The post New Federal Vehicle Charging Funds Halted appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.

Current methods used to process hydrogen into a usable fuel are cost-prohibitive, but several new innovations are promising to open the door to cost-competitive green hydrogen. Hydrogen is well positioned to be the fuel of the future. However, a commercially viable transition to green hydrogen – the environmentally friendly version of the fuel – seems …

The post Fueling the Future: Unlocking Low-Cost Green Hydrogen appeared first on Alternative Energy HQ.