A closer look at that data, however, highlights the widening disparity between the wealthy and the poor: more than 90 percent of adults in households earning $75,000 or more have broadband; it's barely 50 percent in households earning $30,000 or less.
The implications are profound, although not necessarily for all adults. While some older Americans simply aren't interested in using the Internet, children who lack access at home are at risk of falling behind on schoolwork, which could ultimately hinder their chances at academic and professional success.
Pew's research showed that 40 percent of students living in homes where household income was under $25,000 lacked access to broadband; it was 25 percent in homes where household income was between $25,000 and $49,999. Lack of access was even more pronounced for black and Hispanic children.
That digital gap, as Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, recently said, creates "a world of broadband 'haves' and 'have-nots'," and effectively denies Americans "the opportunity to enjoy the full fruits of what broadband has to offer."
Which is why Wheeler has proposed overhauling a 30-year-old federal program, called Lifeline, that helps subsidize poorer Americans' phone service. The revision would allow Lifeline recipients to choose whether to apply the subsidy to phone or broadband.
Commissioners were set to hold an initial vote today, and its approval would trigger a process to craft rules for implementation, concluding with a final vote likely by the end of the year, according to The New York Times.
The existing program, which has imposed new cost-control measures to curb waste and fraud, served as many as 17 million Americans in 2012, according to Politico. Eligibility requires a household income at or below 135 percent of the federal poverty guidelines -- about $15,800 for one person, or $32,700 for a family of four -- or enrollment in one of several qualifying welfare programs.
It was established in 1985 as a means to ensure that every American had access to communications tools critical for modern life. In 1996, Congress ratified the program, and in 2005, terms were modified to permit eligible users to apply the subsidy to a mobile phone rather than a landline.
The latest effort is a reasonable extension of the adaptation made 10 years ago, and one that reflects the rapid changes in the way that Americans communicate, engage in financial transactions and perform day-to-day activities.
As Consumer Reports noted, the program's $9.25 monthly subsidy would nearly cover the cost for access under a program like the one started by Comcast, which charges $9.95 for broadband -- albeit a slower 5 megabits-per-second download speed -- to new subscribers with children participating in schools' free or reduced-cost lunch programs.
The commission's plan to modify Lifeline follows last week's implementation of new consumer-protection rules barring Internet service providers from cutting download speeds according to which website a user visits.
The controversial rules, known as "net neutrality," aim to preserve consumers' abilities to receive all content, regardless of whether it comes from a website owned by the service provider or a competitor, at the speed for which the consumer paid. Service providers, naturally, are not happy that the commission has stripped them of the power to manipulate download speeds, as phone companies weren't happy decades ago when federal regulators broke up monopolies.
The latest changes represent prudent, consumer-friendly measures, consistent with past actions and attuned to the need for the public to have direct, unfettered access to the technology that is reshaping American life. The FCC is on the right track.
©2015 The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, Va.), Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
