The MAP for Broadband Funding Act aims to improve the Broadband Funding Map, a tool that shows where federal funds are used for broadband projects. The bill directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to work with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to regularly update this map with accurate data. It also requires the FCC to seek public input on how to make the map more useful and transparent. Additionally, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) must study how federal agencies are managing and using the map, and whether they are providing complete and timely information. The goal is to ensure federal broadband funds are used efficiently and to avoid funding overlapping projects.
Supporters of the MAP for Broadband Funding Act argue that it will enhance transparency and accountability in federal broadband funding. By improving the Broadband Funding Map, the bill is expected to help identify areas most in need of broadband services and ensure that federal funds are allocated effectively. This could lead to better internet access in underserved communities and prevent wasteful spending on redundant projects.
Critics of the MAP for Broadband Funding Act may express concerns about the potential for increased bureaucratic processes and the burden on federal agencies to provide frequent data updates. There is also the possibility that the focus on mapping and data collection could divert attention and resources away from actual broadband deployment efforts. Additionally, some may question whether the improvements to the Broadband Funding Map will lead to tangible benefits in terms of expanded broadband access.
The MAP for Broadband Funding Act, sponsored by Deb Fischer, does not show any direct industry overlaps with her top donor industries, which include Health Professionals and Retired individuals. The total contributions from these sectors amount to $1.575 billion, but they do not relate to broadband funding. The lobbying activity in this policy area appears to be primarily from educational and community organizations, which further dilutes the potential for conflicts of interest. The absence of overlapping interests suggests that the bill is unlikely to benefit her major donors directly.
Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.
| Client | Lobbying Firm | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| CONSEJO COORDINADOR EMPRESARIAL | IQOM STRATEGIC ADVISORS, LLC | $140,000 |
| CHURCH COMMUNITIES INC. | ONMESSAGE PUBLIC STRATEGIES | $50,000 |
| VARSITY TUTORS | RAW STRATEGIES, LLC | $30,000 |
| STREET GRACE | ASCEND CONSULTING | $30,000 |
| STREET GRACE | ASCEND CONSULTING | $30,000 |
| 3STRANDS GLOBAL FOUNDATION | ASCEND CONSULTING | $10,000 |
| CHRISTIAN CAMP AND CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION | ASCEND CONSULTING | $10,000 |
| 3STRANDS GLOBAL FOUNDATION | ASCEND CONSULTING | $10,000 |
| CHRISTIAN CAMP AND CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION | ASCEND CONSULTING | $10,000 |
| JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY | JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY | undisclosed |
| TONY STRICKLAND CONSULTING FOR HASS AUTOMATION, INC | MLT CONSULTING, LLC | undisclosed |
| THE FERGUSON GROUP, LLC FOR CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY AUTHORITY,NC | EARL STOCKDALE | undisclosed |
| THE FERGUSON GROUP, LLC ON BEHALF OF WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DISTRICT, CA | EARL STOCKDALE | undisclosed |
| THE FERGUSON GROUP, LLC FOR CITY OF OCEANSIDE CA | EARL STOCKDALE | undisclosed |
| THE FERGUSON GROUP, LLC ON BEHALF OF WARD & SMITH (FOR BALD HEAD ISLAND) | EARL STOCKDALE | undisclosed |
Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026
Top industries funding Deb Fischer, ranked by total contributions.
Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)
