Gabe Evans (R-CO)
Expediting Federal Broadband Deployment Reviews Act
A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House 384–9
- In Senate committee
What this bill would do
This Act, titled the "Expediting Federal Broadband Deployment Reviews Act," mandates the creation of an interagency strike force. The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information will establish this force within 180 days of enactment. The strike force is tasked with ensuring Federal land management agencies prioritize reviewing requests for communications use authorizations. These agencies include the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. The strike force will establish goals and monitor agency accountability regarding these reviews. Finally, a report on the strike force's effectiveness must be submitted to Congress.
Yes· 3 of 10
- Scored +6
Does this get reliable internet to more people?
The bill's primary purpose is to expedite the review process for communications facilities to enhance broadband deployment.
- Scored +5
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The mandate to expedite communications use on public and forest lands directly benefits residents in rural areas seeking better connectivity.
- Scored +5
Does this invest in rural communities?
The act specifically aims to expedite broadband deployment on federal lands, which is a critical component of rural development.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
What Congress actually voted on
One recorded vote has been taken on this bill.
- The House: a fast-track vote, needing two-thirds to pass The House sets aside its normal procedure to move quickly: no amendments, little debate, and a two-thirds bar instead of a simple majority. It is used for measures expected to be uncontroversial, so a bill that fails here failed despite broad expectations that it would not. Passed 384 yes · 9 no
04/20/2026 · Roll call 125 · recorded as “On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Prioritized Communications Reviews: The bill requires Federal land management agencies to prioritize the review of requests for communications use authorizations (Section 2(a)(1)). This is intended to ensure the placement and operation of communications facilities, such as easements or leases, are processed more efficiently on covered land (Section 2(b)(5)).
-
Established Accountability and Goals: The strike force is tasked with establishing objective and reasonable goals for the review of communications use requests (Section 2(a)(3)(B)). Additionally, the force will monitor and facilitate accountability for agencies to ensure they are meeting these established goals (Section 2(a)(3)(C)).
-
Congressional Oversight: The Assistant Secretary is required to submit a report to appropriate congressional committees regarding the effectiveness of the strike force (Section 2(a)(4)). This provides a mechanism for the government to report on whether the goal of prioritizing communications reviews is actually being met.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are explicitly detailed in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The mandate to expedite communications use on public and forest lands directly benefits residents in rural areas seeking better connectivity. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Broadband expansion can help bridge the digital divide for lower-income households. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Expanded internet access provides more options for digital services and remote work. Would people in cities be better off under this? — While focused on land management, improved national connectivity has minor benefits for urban infrastructure efficiency.
- Education And Technology
- Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The bill's primary purpose is to expedite the review process for communications facilities to enhance broadband deployment.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — By streamlining the deployment of communications facilities, the act facilitates the expansion of telecommunications infrastructure which can support job growth. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The act facilitates easier access to land for communications use, which can benefit small telecommunications providers.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The act specifically aims to expedite broadband deployment on federal lands, which is a critical component of rural development.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The act mandates a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the strike force, increasing oversight and transparency of the process.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — Improved connectivity can indirectly support remote work and economic stability for families.
- 4/21/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 4/20/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 9 (Roll no. 125). (text: CR H2971-2972)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 9 (Roll no. 125). (text: CR H2971-2972)
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2978-2979)
- At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1681.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2971-2973)
- Mr. Allen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 3/26/2026
- Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-439, Part II.
- Committee on Agriculture discharged.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 494.
- 1/12/2026
- Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-439, Part I.
- 11/18/2025
- Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
- 4/29/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/9/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
- 3/28/2025
- Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.
- 2/27/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia