Hartford Business Journal

HARTFORDBUSINESS.COM | APRIL 1, 2024 29 Opinion & Commentary OTHER VOICES Congress must act to ensure digital equity By James T. Brett I n our 21st-century modern society, the importance of high-speed internet for every individual and household cannot be understated. Internet access enables people to job search and engage in remote work. It enables students of all ages to access remote learning to prepare for the jobs of the future. And it expands access to quality and affordable health care through telehealth. Simply put, high- speed internet access is a vital lifeline that helps Americans stay connected to one another and critical services and resources that are key to economic success and well-being. Unfortunately, for far too many households, the cost of high-speed internet access is a significant barrier. Fortunately, the Infrastructure Investment in Jobs Act of 2021 — more commonly known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law — authorized a program called the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). Administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the ACP provides a monthly subsidy of $30 for eligible households to use for broadband internet. It also provides a one-time $100 benefit toward the purchase of a tablet, laptop or other device that facilitates internet access. Since its launch in December 2021, the ACP has already helped more than 23 million American households gain access to afford- able broadband, including over 186,000 here in Connecticut, and over 800,000 across the entire New England region. Unfortunately, funding for the program is expected to run out as soon as April 2024, leaving millions of Americans in the lurch. Indeed, the program stopped accepting new applications in February 2024. Should Congress not extend funding for the ACP, the impact on digital equity goals would be signifi- cant. This funding shortfall comes at a time when other major investments in digital equity are underway. For example, the Broadband Equity Access Deployment (BEAD) program — also born of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act — will provide $42.5 billion for broadband build out to increase access nationwide. But if the ACP runs out of funds and households cannot afford a connection in newly built-out areas, the BEAD program could also be in peril. Fortunately, in January 2024, bipar- tisan legislation was introduced in both the House and Senate to extend funding for the ACP. The Affordable Connectivity Program Extension Act of 2024 would infuse $7 billion into the program. The proposal has particularly strong support in the House, where there are 180 co-sponsors, including Connecticut's own Reps. Joe Courtney, Jahana Hayes, Jim Himes and John Larson. The Biden admin- istration has also called for extending ACP funding, sending Congress a supplemental request for $6 billion in October 2023. Hundreds of other groups — including the National Governors Association, AARP, U.S. Chamber of Commerce and U.S. Conference of Mayors — have expressed support for extending ACP funding. And in January 2024, The New England Council was proud to add our name to the long list of supporters of the ACP, sending a letter to each member of the region's Congres- sional delegation urging them to support extending funding. Congress certainly has a variety of complex issues to confront in the months ahead — from passing government funding, to grappling with conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. But extending funding for the ACP should be a no-brainer. It is imperative that we continue to work to close the digital divide across the United States, and ensure equitable internet access for all Amer- icans. Investing in this program is an investment in our nation's continued economic growth and well-being, and will no doubt have a lasting impact on millions of Americans for years to come. James T. Brett is the president and CEO of The New England Council, a regional alliance of businesses, nonprofit organizations, and health and educational institutions dedicated to supporting economic growth and quality of life in New England. Jim Brett OTHER VOICES The economic case for unemployment benefits for striking workers By Michele Evermore T hanks to great leadership, visionary work in the state legislature and Connecticut's stellar workforce, the state economy is growing, unemployment is at historic lows, and people are moving into the state, reversing historic trends. The state expects employment to continue to grow. The best way to ensure that happens is by making sure everyone shares in that growth so the money churns throughout the local economy. One of the most effective tools that we have to prevent wage erosion and instability in one sector from spreading to other sectors is unemployment insurance (UI). It is the most powerful macroeconomic stabilizer in our economic toolkit. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) reports that every $1 paid in unemployment benefits at the height of the pandemic generated $1.92 of local economic activity. Moreover, UI is intended to prevent wage erosion by providing sufficient replacement of prior income so workers won't have to take a new job out of desperation, and can instead hold out for a better, more suitable replacement for their old job. Bipartisan federal commissions have recommended that roughly 50% of prior wages should be paid up to a cap. In Connecticut, average income replacement is around 36% to 42%, depending on how it is calculated. Workers in the Nutmeg State don't get a windfall. At the same time, unions bargain to prevent wage loss and keep good benefits, such as health care and retirement security. Particularly in low-wage sectors, unions raise the standard of living for workers in their industry. When unions are able to beat back concessions and make progress for their members, those gains spread to other workers in the community as well. Workers fought for and won the right to strike in 1935 in order to give them the power to achieve the contracts that built the middle class. However, with the decline of union density came wage erosion that makes exercising the right to strike increasingly difficult for workers. That is why passing legislation allowing workers on strike to access UI benefits is a win-win. The cost would be minimal. The Economic Policy Institute looked at new unemployment claims in 2022-2023 and strike activity over that period, and found that if workers could access UI, it would amount to just 2% of statewide initial claims for benefits, and 0.3% of weekly claims past that first payment. It is important to note that during the period studied, there were historic lows in unemployment and unusually high strike activity. If the economy softens, not only will there be more unemployed people, but they will be more likely to apply for UI. Meanwhile, there will likely be fewer workers striking. That means that the extremely low striker utiliza- tion of UI benefits in the period EPI studied would be even lower during normal times. Furthermore, collective bargaining agreements often have just-cause provisions preventing workers from being randomly fired, and providing alternative options to layoffs, which also reduces the strain on the UI system. This legislation won't give workers extra power at the bargaining table, it will just help ensure they don't starve when they are fighting for a better future for themselves and their kids. Right now, in Connecticut, UI claimants are allowed to refuse work in vacancies resulting from strikes. So essentially, we are telling workers they aren't expected to cross strike lines to be eligible for UI unless it is their own strike line. If anything, this bill would keep parties at the table to avoid costly and disruptive labor disputes. We are at a decision point in Connecticut. We can decide that we want a growing economy that we all share in, where workers earn enough to fully participate in the economy, or we can allow fear to guide us into an economy with increasing inequality and uncertainty for workers. Including striking workers in unem- ployment insurance, as our neighbors New Jersey and New York do, will help to ensure that we continue to build a sustainable economy from the bottom up and middle out. Michele Evermore is the interim director of disability economic justice and senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive, indepen- dent think tank based in New York and Washington, D.C. Michele Evermore

• Cover