Commentary: AB 1414 will widen the digital divide and hurt those it purports to help

Note: This article is being published as a paid political commentary.

At a time when millions of California residents are struggling to make ends meet and the price of everyday expenses continues to rise, a new bill threatens to take away a vital tool keeping internet costs below market rate for renters across the state.

AB 1414 is an anti-affordability bill masked as consumer protection, and it will only serve to widen the digital divide in California. The bill, which would require multi-unit property owners to provide a refund to tenants who decline the internet service provided through the building’s contract with a specific internet service provider (ISP), doesn’t expand choice as it claims. Instead, it will shrink affordability.

Bulk billing is a tool that keeps internet prices low for tenants in multi-unit buildings. Its utilization in residential buildings including senior housing, affordable housing complexes and college dormitories guarantees that every unit in the complex has internet connectivity. Without it, low-income families and tenants risk losing access altogether, and we know that internet access is directly correlated to quality of life.

A 2024 study published in the journal Technology, Mind and Behavior analyzed data from nearly 2.5 million people across 168 countries using the annual Gallup World Poll. Across tens of thousands of methods of analysis, about 85% showed that those who have and use the internet report greater well-being than those who do not.

The crux of the savings realized through bulk billing is the efficient sharing of costs among every unit in a building. AB 1414’s supporters want to convince you that providing an opt-out is the consumer-friendly thing to do. In reality, the opt-out undermines the basis of the cost savings and will lead to bulk billing being phased out.

There doesn’t have to be an outright ban on bulk billing to set the stage for its demise. And when it’s gone, the people who lose will be the people who need its benefits the most, like seniors, students and individuals and families surviving on low incomes. Ending bulk billing will result in higher bills for everyone, including those already struggling.

Once that door opens, it’s not a stretch to foresee further impacts down the road. It’s just a short, slippery slope to similar programs like those offered through some school district partnerships with ISPs, keeping California students connected to home internet through bulk subsidies. The bill’s lack of technology neutrality also creates winners and losers, granting certain types of providers an unfair advantage over their competitors.

Those pushing AB 1414 like to call it consumer protection, but in reality, it’s a consumer cost hike. It will kill affordability, drive up costs, worsen the digital divide and add to housing pressure. And make no mistake about it: with a built-in exemption for Homeowners Associations (HOAs), this bill targets and punishes renters, reserving the economic advantages of bulk billing for those with the means to buy a home.

The truth, very simply, is this: bulk billing is good for consumers. Taking away bulk discounts raises total housing costs when Californians can least afford it.

Janus Norman is the President & CEO of the California Broadband & Video Association (CalBroadband). CalBroadband is a coalition of leaders investing in the deployment and upgrading of California’s broadband infrastructure. Our member companies are committed to advancing public policies that increase access to affordable high-speed internet in a manner that encourages persistent innovation and greater connectivity for all Californians.

The news and editorial staffs of The San Diego Union-Tribune had no role in this post’s preparation.