Brendan Carr, the FCC chairman, has a new target in his crosshairs: a $2 billion program that keeps America's schools and libraries wired to the Internet. And his reasoning? Too much screen time for kids.
The E-Rate program, established in 1996, has quietly become the backbone of digital learning in tens of thousands of schools and libraries. It funds everything from Wi-Fi routers to fiber-optic connections, ensuring that even poor rural districts can get online. But Carr, a Trump appointee who has made a name for himself by gutting Obama-era net neutrality rules, now says the program is turning children into screen-addicted zombies.
“We have a generation of kids staring at screens for eight, ten hours a day,” Carr said in a statement Thursday. “It’s a public health menace. The federal government shouldn’t be subsidizing that.”
The proposal, which Carr plans to put to a vote at the FCC’s July meeting, would phase out E-Rate funding over three years. He argues that private companies and state governments should step in to fill the gap. But critics say the move is rooted in culture-war politics, not sound policy.
“This is a guy who wants to be the nation’s parent,” said Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democratic commissioner and former acting chairwoman. “He’s not interested in data or the digital divide. He’s interested in telling families how to raise their kids.”
The real cost of cutting E-Rate
E-Rate isn’t some obscure bureaucrat's pet project. It’s the reason a kid in a trailer park in Mississippi can submit homework online. It’s why a public library in rural Montana can offer free computer classes. The program, funded by fees on phone bills, has connected more than 100,000 schools and libraries since its inception.
According to the FCC’s own data, nearly 30% of schools in low-income areas still lack adequate broadband. E-Rate is their lifeline. Killing it would be like pulling the plug on a patient who’s just begun to breathe.
“Carr is using screen-time anxiety as a Trojan horse to dismantle a program that actually works,” said Evan Greer, director of the digital rights group Fight for the Future. “Kids aren’t addicted to school Wi-Fi. They’re addicted to TikTok and YouTube. Maybe regulate the platforms, not the infrastructure that lets them learn.”
“This is a guy who wants to be the nation’s parent. He’s not interested in data or the digital divide.” — Jessica Rosenworcel, FCC Commissioner
The move has sparked a furious backlash from education groups, librarians, and even some Republican lawmakers who represent rural districts. “My schools need this money,” said Senator John Hoeven (R-N.D.). “I’m not going to support a plan that cuts off my constituents from the 21st century economy.”
A pattern of partisan ambushes
This isn’t Carr’s first attempt to slash programs he dislikes. Since taking over as chairman, he’s led the charge to roll back net neutrality rules, loosen media ownership limits, and limit funding for low-income broadband subsidies. He’s been a reliable ally of telecom giants like AT&T and Comcast, which have long chafed at E-Rate’s surcharges.
But the screen-time argument is a new twist. Carr cites studies linking excessive screen use to depression, obesity, and attention disorders in children. Those studies are real — but they’re about recreational screen time, not educational use. “A kid doing math homework on a laptop is not the same as a kid watching YouTube for five hours,” said Dr. Megan Moreno, a pediatrician at the University of Wisconsin who researches media use. “Conflating the two is dangerous and dishonest.”
If Carr gets his way, schools would have to rely on state budgets — many of which are already stretched thin — or private donations. In practice, that means wealthy districts would keep their connections while poor ones fall further behind. The digital divide, which narrowed during the pandemic thanks in part to E-Rate, would widen again.
“This is a gift to the broadband industry,” said Rosenworcel. “They want to sell high-priced contracts to schools without a government program competing. Carr is doing their bidding.”
The politics of parental control
Carr’s crusade also taps into a broader cultural panic about screens. Parents, teachers, and politicians have grown increasingly alarmed at the hold that devices have on kids. Some schools have banned smartphones entirely. Florida recently passed a law restricting social media for minors. Carr wants to be seen as part of that movement.
But even conservative commentators are wary. “I get the screen-time concern, but killing E-Rate is like using a flamethrower to trim your hedges,” wrote National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke. “The program serves a legitimate purpose. There are smarter ways to address screen addiction.”
Critics note that if Carr were genuinely worried about kids’ health, he could push for content filters or time limits on school networks. Instead, he’s targeting the pipe itself. “He’s not solving a problem,” Greer said. “He’s picking a fight.”
The FCC is expected to vote on the proposal in July. With a 3-2 Republican majority, it’s likely to pass — setting up a legal battle and a lobbying war in Congress. The stakes are high: for millions of students, E-Rate isn’t a luxury. It’s the only way they can do their homework.
Carr may see himself as a crusader against screen time. But what he’s really doing is cutting off kids from the future. And that’s not parenting. It’s sabotage.
