Red Tape Isn't the Only Reason America Can't Build

The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.
The buzziest idea in Democratic politics right now is the 'abundance agenda,' which criticizes liberals for saddling government programs with bureaucratic red tape that delays those programs to the point of never delivering. Few examples seem to illustrate the point better than rural broadband.
As part of the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, Congress allocated $42.5 billion in subsidies to a new Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program. Its required 14 procedural steps to actually get this funding to internet service providers, or ISPs—companies such as AT&T, Verizon, Charter, and Frontier—along with significant labor, environmental, and domestic-production requirements, seem to fit the pattern of a well-intentioned program that has been stuffed with too many bells and whistles. (One of us, Asad Ramzanali, worked on broadband issues including BEAD in both the House of Representatives and the White House.)
Thus, three and a half years after the law passed, shovels have still not broken ground on any project funded by this program, as the New York Times columnist Ezra Klein recently explained to an incredulous Jon Stewart, who lamented the 'incredibly frustrating, overcomplicated Rube Goldberg machine that keeps people from getting broadband.'
Figuring out how to provide high-speed internet to all Americans has been an important public-policy goal for decades. As the coronavirus pandemic made painfully clear, broadband is crucial to full participation in society. And multiple empirical studies have shown that increased broadband access is correlated with stronger economic growth. Yet more than 7 million homes and businesses still do not have access.
But the current political debate misunderstands the nature of the problem at almost every level. When it comes to broadband, procedural simplicity on its own hasn't worked in the past and won't work in the future. The deeper issue is that the United States government has abandoned the full range of policy tools that would actually get the job done. Any effort to achieve 'abundance' must start by recognizing that red tape isn't the only reason America can't seem to build anymore.
The BEAD program does seem overcomplicated. It requires the Federal Communications Commission to complete a national map of where broadband is currently missing, the Commerce Department to distribute funding to states, state-level broadband offices to allocate subgrants to internet service providers, and the ISPs to deploy cables to connect homes to the internet. The numerous intermediate steps—initial planning grants, five-year action plans, map challenges, final plans, and more—sound like the kind of red tape that blocks progress and generates distrust in government.
The solution seems glaringly obvious: simplify the steps. Cut out all the middlemen and empower the FCC to provide money directly to ISPs as efficiently and quickly as possible. Any reasonable person would reach that conclusion.
The first Trump administration had the same thought. In 2020, the FCC rolled out a multibillion-dollar program called the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF). To allocate the money, the FCC quickly identified areas that had insufficient service. It then held a reverse auction of small geographic plots, awarding the subsidy to whichever ISP submitted the lowest bid for each plot. There was no notice of funding opportunity. No planning grants. No five-year action plans. No subgranting process. No state broadband offices. And no labor, environmental, small-business, or diversity requirements. ISPs quickly bid a cumulative $9.2 billion to serve high-speed broadband to 5.2 million homes and businesses.
[Jerusalem Demsas: Not everyone should have a say]
In many ways, RDOF was a neoliberal economist's dream—an efficient allocation of scarce public resources distributed through a competitive process. But removing bureaucratic steps turned out not to result in a better outcome. Without accurate mapping data to understand where need existed, RDOF allowed ISPs to bid on serving such locations as an empty patch of grass, industrial-park storage tanks, and a luxury resort that already had broadband. Without proper due diligence, other providers committed to projects that were not technically or financially feasible.
As a result, the RDOF program still hasn't delivered much broadband to Americans. More than one-third of the bids have already been deemed in default, according to the FCC. In other words, nearly 2 million of the 5.2 million promised locations will never get service under the program, and that number is likely to keep growing. Worse, many of these locations may not get service from BEAD, either, because RDOF was assumed to cover them.
Within that context, Congress's approach to the BEAD program—making sure that broadband maps are accurate; that state governments, who know their residents and needs best, develop thorough plans that will ensure long-lasting service; and that communities have opportunities to provide input—is less baffling. With the benefit of hindsight, the process should have been simpler. But Congress was clearly responding to the failures of RDOF, which meant more checks in the system.
Why is internet service a problem that the government needs to solve, anyway? The answer is that private-sector companies seek to maximize profits, but in many rural areas, building networks is unprofitable. There might not be enough customers to offset the onetime costs of construction or even the ongoing costs of repairs, customer service, and overhead.
To date, the federal government's approach to promoting service in unprofitable areas has almost exclusively been to subsidize private companies. The first federal broadband subsidies go back to at least 1995. Since then, the U.S. has put more than $100 billion into broadband expansion, primarily into rural areas, across more than 100 federal programs. Like RDOF, many of these programs have severely underperformed.
This is what happens when government loses the ability, or the will, to undertake more direct interventions in the market and to challenge, not merely subsidize, corporations. A century ago, America faced a problem almost identical to the broadband shortage: rural electrification. Well into the 20th century, life in much of rural America was little changed from the 19th. Without electric appliances—refrigerators, washing machines, even lamps—running a farm was backbreaking, round-the-clock work. By 1935, private providers had electrified more than 80 percent of nonfarm households but only 11 percent of farm households. That year, as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Congress created the Rural Electrification Administration to address this problem.
At first, REA Administrator Morris Cooke hoped to partner with private electricity companies, not unlike our current subsidy-heavy approach for broadband. However, those companies argued that rural electrification would not be financially self-sustaining. Even with government support, they proposed building out to only 351,000 new customers, which would leave millions unconnected.
The New Dealers recognized that subsidies to private firms could only go so far. So they turned to three other strategies. First, when the private sector was unable to serve all Americans, the REA organized communities across the country to develop their own, cooperatively owned electricity-distribution networks, funded by the federal government. The REA encouraged state laws to charter these cooperatives, provided engineering support to build infrastructure, and assisted cooperatives in negotiating for sources of electrical power.
Second, the New Deal created public options. Federal government–owned providers, most famously the Tennessee Valley Authority, were established to generate electricity at affordable rates. These public options functioned as an important 'yardstick,' in Roosevelt's words, to evaluate the performance of the private sector. If the private sector refused to offer electricity at affordable rates, the TVA could step in to sell electricity directly to cooperatives instead.
Third, private-sector electricity providers were classified as public utilities subject to strict regulation. The government couldn't build public plants to generate power across the entire country or successfully organize every community. So it required electric companies to expand services to cover everyone in their existing and adjacent service areas, even households that were unprofitable to serve. These utilities were required to set prices that allowed them to turn reasonable but not excessive profits.
[George Packer: How Virginia took on Dominion Energy]
The REA was a success. By 1940, a quarter of farm households were electrified, and by 1953, that figure had risen to 90 percent. That same year, retail rural electricity rates approximated rates found in urban areas.
A similar approach could be applied to rural broadband today. Local governments could offer public broadband—as happened in Chattanooga, Tennessee, which has one of the fastest broadband networks in the world, run by the municipally owned electric company, a public option that competes with Xfinity and AT&T. Cooperatives could purchase internet service in the same way as they buy electricity. And public-utility regulations could require broadband providers to cover areas adjacent to their service areas at a reasonable price in exchange for rate regulation.
So why has the federal government focused on subsidizing for-profit ISPs rather than using the mixed approach that worked during the New Deal era?
Consider what happened in Chattanooga. After its municipal model proved successful, ISPs saw a threat and mobilized. They successfully lobbied lawmakers to pass laws restricting public options in broadband. Twenty-five states, including Tennessee, had such laws on the books in 2019, according to a report by BroadbandNow. In Congress, Democrats have repeatedly proposed federal legislation to preempt such state laws, but those proposals have languished. And although some of the state limits on public options have been repealed, 16 states still restrict municipal broadband. Lobbying from ISPs might likewise explain why the FCC has never used its existing legal authority to require ISPs to expand service at mandated affordable prices. (A conservative appeals court foreclosed that option for the FCC only recently.)
The lesson of rural broadband is that some government failures are due not to procedural excess, but to giving up on regulatory tools that might antagonize Big Business. Unfortunately, learning this lesson again may now cost us $42.5 billion. Last week, the Department of Commerce rolled back many procedural hoops of the BEAD program—ostensibly with the same goals as RDOF. It's tempting to think that America can learn how to build again without having to wage difficult battles against powerful corporate interests, simply by eliminating bureaucratic red tape. But if efficient building were really so easy, we'd already be doing it.
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

an hour ago

• USA Today

Live updates: Iran calls US airstrikes on nuclear sites 'outrageous,' says it 'reserves all options'

America's move comes after Iran and Israel have been engaged in aerial strikes and Trump had been pondering US involvement for the past week. The United States joined Israel's war with Iran after President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes on three nuclear targets, winning praise and condemnation from members of Congress and new defiance from Tehran. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated," Trump said in a live address after 10 p.m. ET on June 21, threatening further U.S. strikes if Iran failed to accept a diplomatic solution. Bombs and missiles launched from U.S. warplanes hit nuclear sites at Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz. No U.S. personnel were injured in the operation, which struck Iran well after midnight on June 22 local time. With 40,000 troops in the Persian Gulf region, the United States faces potential Iranian reprisals in the days ahead. Seyed Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, warned that the country "reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people," saying America's strike was "outrageous and will have everlasting consequences." "Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior," he said on social media. Trump's move was assailed by some conservative Republicans and progressive Democrats in Congress as illegal, while others praised the move after more than a week of Israeli airstrikes on Iran and retaliatory missile fire wreaking havoc in Israel. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,' Trump said. More: U.S. hits Iran nuclear facilities, braces for counterattack Israel says Iran launched another round of missiles Multiple explosions were heard in central Israel, including over Tel Aviv, in the early hours of June 22. Israel's military said sirens that sounded across the region were "due to another Iranian missile launch." USA TODAY could not immediately confirm any information on potential fatalities or injuries in the strikes. Iran says it 'reserves all options' to defend itself Iran reserves all options to defend itself after U.S. strikes on its nuclear facilities, Araqchi shared on X, saying the attacks were "outrageous and will have everlasting consequences." "Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior," he said. What's the risk of nuclear fallout from the Iran attacks? The U.S. attacks against three of Iran's nuclear facilities, following Israeli attacks over the previous week, prompted questions about the potential risks of radiological or chemical releases. Both "The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists" and the International Atomic Energy Agency have previously stated the offsite risks are low from attacks at Fordow and Natanz. But in a June 20 post, François Diaz-Maurin, an associate editor for nuclear affairs at the atomic bulletin, termed the offsite risk at Isfahan 'moderate,' because it's one of the 'most important sites for Iran's nuclear program.' The International Atomic Energy Agency began posting updates on the new attacks on June 21. The nuclear complex in Isfahan, a key site of the Iranian nuclear program, has repeatedly been attacked and extensively damaged before June 21, said Rafael Mariano Grossi, agency director. 'Based on our analysis of the nuclear material present, we don't see any risk of off-site contamination," Grossi said. -Dinah Pulver Attack used bunker-buster bombs The Pentagon's attack on Iran's nuclear facility employed its most powerful bunker-buster bomb as well as Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from submarines, according to a U.S. official. Pentagon planners coordinated the attack with Israel to enter Iran's airspace, said the official who had been briefed on the mission but was not authorized to speak publicly. B-2 bombers dropped GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs, the first time they have been used in combat. The stealth bombers were accompanied by other aircraft, the official said, though it was unclear the type of warplane. The Pentagon's most sophisticated fighter, the F-22, was a likely candidate. President Donald Trump declared the attack a success, saying Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities had been completely 'obliterated.' The official, however, said battle-damage assessments had not reached a firm conclusion. −Tom Vanden Brook AOC condemns Trump's attacks, calling it a constitutional violation Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is the latest lawmaker to take to social media in the hours after President Donald Trump's strikes on Iran to weigh in on the move, calling it 'grounds for impeachment.' 'The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers,' she said in the post on X, formerly Twitter, published shortly after Trump's White House address. Congress is the only branch of government that has the power to declare war, however, presidents have engaged in foreign conflicts in recent decades under the executive authority to authorize defensive strikes 'He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations,' Ocasio-Cortez said. 'It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.' −Kathryn Palmer Will Iran counterattack? Tehran could respond to Trump's strikes by launching counterattacks on U.S. military bases in the Middle East, current and former U.S. officials say. American bases in Gulf countries and Iraq and Syria could become targets, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro told USA TODAY before Trump attacked Iran. Iran could also target regional energy facilities and block oil and gas shipments from crossing the Strait of Hormuz, said Shapiro, the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East in the Biden administration. Roughly 40,000 American troops are stationed in the region. Trump warned in a Truth Social post of 'far greater' force against Iran if it pursues retaliation. −Francesca Chambers Muslim civil rights group condemns U.S. strikes on Iran The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, blasted President Trump's attack as an 'illegal and unjustified act of war' that favors the wishes of Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu over the American people and threatens to drag the United States into a wider conflict. 'We condemn President Trump's illegal and unjustified act of war against Iran,' CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said in a statement. 'This attack, carried out under pressure from the out-of-control Israeli government, took place despite the longstanding conclusion by our nation's intelligence community that Iran was not seeking nuclear weapons.' 'Just as President Bush started a disastrous war in Iraq pushed by war hawks, neoconservatives, and Israeli leaders like Netanyahu, President Trump has attacked Iran based on the same type of false information put forward by those who consistently seek to drag our nation into unnecessary and catastrophic wars,' Awad said. -Josh Meyer Pete Hegseth to hold a press conference from the Pentagon Hours after the U.S. military launched strikes against three nuclear sites in Iran, President Trump addressed the nation from the White House calling the operation a 'spectacular military success.' He said Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth will hold a press conference at 8 am on July 22 at the Pentagon. Trump said the mission's objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the 'world's number one state sponsor of terror.' 'If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill,' said Trump. 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes.' -Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy Iranian retaliation could happen anywhere, ex-official says Terror alert levels should be elevated in the near term, even in major cities outside the Middle East and anywhere Iran may have sleeper cells, said Andrew Borene, a former senior official at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Counterterrorism Center. 'What happens next is largely going to be driven by Tehran's next moves. Their shadow wars have never been confined to missiles, drones, and cyber attacks,' said Borene, who is now executive director for Global Security at private intelligence firm Flashpoint. Borene said in an analysis that there is 'a real risk of further spillover if Iran resorts to its historical use of asymmetric means through proxy terrorism.' Offensive cyber operations on critical infrastructure, or terrorist attacks by Iranian proxies, also could rapidly derail hope for de-escalation and diplomacy in the near term, Borene said. -Josh Meyer Peace or tragedy, Trump tells Iran 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,' Trump said. He noted that there are many other targets in Iran. 'If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes,' he said. -Sarah Wire Trump says 'future attacks' could be worse 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' Trump said in his address to the nation. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' He then described tactics of the regime. 'For 40 years, Iran has been saying, 'Death to America,' 'Death to Israel,'' he said. 'They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs. That was their specialty.' The president appeared to be referring to attacks launched by Iran-backed militants in the years after the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. -Erin Mansfield Netanyahu congratulates Trump on Iran bombing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised President Trump for bombing three Iran nuclear sites, saying the decision could lead the Middle East toward a future of 'prosperity and peace.' 'America has been truly unsurpassed,' Netanyahu said in a video statement. 'It has done what no other country on earth could do. History will record that President Trump acted to deny the world's most dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons.' -Erin Mansfield What is Fordow? Fordow is an Iranian underground uranium enrichment facility located about 80 to 90 meters deep inside a mountain, according to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. More: US bombs Iran: What to know about possible weapon, the 'bunker buster' It is located 20 miles north of the Iranian city of Qom. Fordow was one of three nuclear sites, including Natanz and Isfahan, that were struck by US military operations on July 21 to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon. "A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow," Trump wrote on Truth Social. -Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy Bomb-carrying B-2 stealth fleet launched from Missouri base B-2 bombers took off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri in the early morning hours of June 21. The warplanes are known not only for their stealth technology, but also for their ability to fly long-range and carry the big 'bunker buster' bombs used in the June 21 mission. With design and materials that limit its ability to be detected by enemy radar, the B-2 is thought to be the only aircraft equipped to carry the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or GBU-57, known as the "bunker buster." The entire fleet of B-2 stealth bombers is based at Whiteman, southeast of Kansas City, with the 509th Bomb Wing, part of the Air Force Global Strike Command. Fox News reported six bunker-buster bombs were dropped on Iran's Fordow nuclear site. -Dinah Pulver Democrats in Congress erupt at Trump Democratic members of Congress expressed outrage over the strikes, which they said they learned about from social media. 'According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop,' said Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, in a post on X. Virginia Rep. Eugene Vindman said Trump's handling of the situation was 'disgraceful." He asserted in a post that the U.S. was now at war with Iran. 'And so the United States goes to war with Iran without so much as a by your leave to the American people,' he said. 'No statement, other than on social media; no notice to Congress; no serious deliberation.' He added: 'This is the stuff of autocrats. Disgraceful.' War is something only Congress can formally declare. Lawmakers have also passed resolutions that authorized the use of military force like when the U.S. invaded Iraq. Trump has not said whether he plans to continue the bombing campaign, which he described as a "military operation" in a post on the attack. At least one Democrat came to Trump's defense, however: Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. "As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS. Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world," Fetterman said. Democratic Majority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement that was critical of Trump that Congress should "fully and immediately" be briefed in a classified setting. – Francesca Chambers Can the president bomb a country without Congress? The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war. The president is the commander in chief of the military, which means he carries out wars that Congress approves. However, presidents of both political parties have perennially used the U.S. military to bomb or invade countries without formal approval from Congress. There have even been allegations that the Korean War and the Vietnam War were illegal. Congress attempted to limit presidents from using this type of power when it passed the 1973 War Powers Act. Trump was most recently criticized for potentially violating the War Powers Act when he bombed the Houthis in Yemen, notoriously discussed on the SignalGate chat that embarrassed top officials in his administration. -Erin Mansfield B-2 bombers conducted strikes on Iranian targets B-2 bombers conducted a series of strikes on targets in Iran, according to a senior Defense Department official. There were no casualties. Measures to protect the nearly 40,000 U.S. troops in the region have been incrementally increased over the last two weeks, said the official who was not authorized to speak publicly. The Army has been at third of four levels of alert at most places in the region, the official said. -Tom Vanden Brook More: U.S. hits Iran nuclear facilities, braces for counterattack Trump to address nation at 10 pm ET President Trump posted on Truth Social that he will be speaking to the nation at 10 p.m. ET on June 21. "I will be giving an Address to the Nation at 10:00 P.M., at the White House, regarding our very successful military operation in Iran," Trump wrote. "This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!" -Swapna Venugopal Republican lawmaker says Iran strike is 'not constitutional' Trump's decision came under immediate criticism from at least one Republican in Congress: Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie. The lawmaker shared Trump's post on social media with the message, 'This is not Constitutional.' Massie had previously introduced a bill to prevent Trump from going to war with Iran without congressional authorization, which drew cosponsors that included progressive Democrats such as Rep. Ro Khanna of California. The GOP lawmaker was one of two members of Trump's political party who voted against his tax bill in the House of Representatives last month. Trump called him a 'grandstander' ahead of the vote and said he should be 'voted out of office.' Far-right GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, an ally of Trump's, publicly pushed for the U.S. to stay out of the war, a half hour before Trump announced the attack. 'Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war,' she said in a post on X. Greene has been one of the most outspoken opponent's within MAGA of American military involvement in the conflict that exploded on June 13 when Israel attacked Iranian nuclear sites. 'There would not be bombs falling on the people of Israel if Netanyahu had not dropped bombs on the people of Iran first,' she said on June 21. 'Israel is a nuclear armed nation. This is not our fight. Peace is the answer.' –Francesca Chambers State Department evacuations from Israel Earlier in the day, the State Department began evacuating American citizens and permanent residents from Israel and the West Bank, U.S Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee announced on social media. 'The Department of State has begun assisted departure flights from Israel,' Huckabee wrote in a post on X on June 21 asking people seeking government assistance to fill out a form. -Swapna Venugopal How the war started The strikes followed days of Israeli bomb and drone strikes that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu aimed at disrupting Iran's quest for a nuclear weapon, to which Iran responded by launching missiles at Israeli civilian targets. Netanyahu had been pressing President Donald Trump to enter the war, knowing the Pentagon possesses the ability to destroy Iran's nuclear enrichment capability. In his first term, Trump pulled out of the Iran deal brokered by President Barack Obama in 2015, saying it did not do enough to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. As the war between Iran and Israel has spiraled in recent days, he has repeated that Iran "cannot" get a nuclear weapon. Iran has threatened that the U.S. would suffer "irreparable damage" if it becomes directly involved in the conflict. The U.S. "should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage," Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on June 18. Only US warheads could penetrate Iranian nuclear site The U.S. Air Force has the unique capability to destroy deeply buried, fortified structures like those that house Iran's nuclear facilities. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or GBU-57, has a 'high-performance steel alloy' warhead case that allows the weapon to stay intact as it burrows deep into the ground, according to Pentagon documents. In 2012, the Air Force conducted five tests of the weapon at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Data and visual inspections showed that each bombing run 'effectively prosecuted the targets.' More: Israel wants to demolish Iran's nuclear facilities. Does it need US military help? There's only one warplane in the Air Force that can carry the bomb. Each B-2 Spirit stealth bomber based at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri can hold two of the penetrators. Israel had sought the Pentagon to drop the bombs because their penetrating weapons cannot reach the depth necessary to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to speak publicly. -Tom Vanden Brook

The Onion

an hour ago

• The Onion

Congress, Now More Than Ever, Our Nation Needs Your Cowardice

Published: Who will stand up for our democracy? This question, fraught in even the most peaceful times, has only grown more pressing as our country approaches its 250th anniversary. Each passing day brings growing assaults on essential liberties like freedom of speech and due process. Meanwhile, our delicately assembled legal system faces a constant barrage of threats. Even as this issue reaches publication, the U.S. military has been deployed against peaceful protestors. We teeter on the brink of collapse into an authoritarian state. That is why, today, The Onion calls upon our lawmakers to sit back and do absolutely nothing. Members of Congress—now, more than ever, our nation desperately needs your cowardice. Our republic is a birthright, an exceedingly rare treasure passed down from generation to generation of Americans. It was gained through hard years of bloody resistance and can too easily be lost. Our Founding Fathers, in their abundant wisdom, understood that all it would take was men and women of little courage sitting in the corridors of power and taking zero action as this precious inheritance was stripped away—and that is where we have finally arrived. Now is not the time for bravery or valor! This is the time for protecting your own hide and lining your pocket. Now is not the time for listening to your idiotic constituents drone on about what's happening to their precious democracy. This is the time for getting down on all fours and groveling. Now is not the time to say, 'Enough is enough,' and have the tough conversations about resisting the ongoing assaults on American liberty. This is the time to let the wave of apathy and indifference roll over you as you think about getting a really nice renovation to your house in Kalorama. But what can I, one coward, do alone? you might ask. It's true. As a solitary person, your fecklessness will make little impact. But if you join together with the most craven senators and representatives in the Capitol, the impact will be immense: The corruption, the disregard for the rule of law, the shipping of residents to foreign gulags, the attacks on judges, the censorship and chilling of speech, the punishment of any and all dissent—it can be made that much worse if you just find it in yourself to clutch your head in your hands, wet the bed, and cower in the hope of being spared from the White House's wrath. It won't be easy, but you must search deep within yourself and muster up every ounce of gutlessness you have. Then, bend over and lick the president's boots. Why? Because ultimately none of this matters. Democracy? Equality? The U.S. Constitution? These are hollow phrases. They mean nothing. But money—delicious money? That is solid. You can hold it in your hands. You know this. We know this, too. Only our infantile citizenry fail to appreciate how much you stand to gain by kissing the ring. In our nation's darkest moments, the public often looks to Congress for profiles in meekness. We search for men and women much like yourselves, emotional weaklings who are afraid to meet their own glance in the mirror, insignificant do-nothings who quake in their boots at the mention of the slightest exertion. Many of you have already distinguished yourselves as such individuals. To them, our country's oligarchs can only offer their boundless thanks. Take solace knowing you are not alone in this endeavor. Over the grand expanse of American history, there have been countless lawmakers who managed to summon up their complete lack of backbone and do the easy thing. Think of the members of Congress who turned a blind eye to Japanese American internment, McCarthyism, or the horrors of the Holocaust, all because doing something seemed a little too hard, a little too inconvenient. These men should be your inspiration. Never forget: You stand on the shoulders of spineless giants. But we have not descended entirely from a nation of fearful men, have we? Let this be the moment to make amends for any missteps of American bravery and valor. Congress, we are asking, nay, demanding: This coming Independence Day, don't wave the Stars and Stripes, that enduring symbol of liberty and rebellion. Instead, wave the white flag of surrender. Tu Stultus Es, The Onion Editorial Board

2 hours ago

After Trump attacks Iran, what experts and officials fear for the American homeland

In the wake of President Donald Trump's "massive precision strikes" on Iran, concerns have been raised both for Americans in the region and at home. A principal area of worry is cyberattacks by Iranian state actors, including targeting the banking system or energy grid. A recent Department of Homeland Security bulletin warned: "Iranian government-affiliated cyber actors will probably prioritize retaliatory attacks against Israeli targets in the short term but may target U.S. networks due to their perception of U.S. support for Israeli strikes." The bulletin urged domestic critical infrastructure entities to "immediately" assess and shore up their security. Such attacks have already infiltrated U.S. water and wastewater systems, according to the non-profit think tank Center for Internet Security, which briefed law enforcement on Friday. The Center was also concerned that Iran, in the wake of Israeli military strikes, might use "crude or escalatory tactics" or informal networks if its capabilities were degraded. "The likelihood of such attacks will increase if the U.S. strikes Iran or overtly provides military support to the Israeli air campaign," the group said. And the Center assessed that Iran's considerable network of proxy groups might be able to strike U.S. interests in the Middle East, though their capacity to strike the U.S. homeland was more limited. The groups, they assessed, while less sophisticated, could still disrupt public infrastructure and the private sector. On top of that was the fear of attacks by foreign nationals or American citizens inspired to strike the U.S. In 2018, the National Counterterrorism Center issued a report saying Iran-sponsored or Shia-inspired -- referring to one of the two major branches of Islam which is dominant in Iran -- terror on the U.S. homeland is unlikely, except if the U.S. were to attack Iran. "Given sustained bilateral U.S.-Iran tensions, the occurrence of such a catalyst could prompt Shia HVE [homegrown violent extremist] activity relatively quickly, underscoring the benefits of early engagement with Shia communities about indicators of HVE radicalization. Potential triggering events for such Shia HVE violence include U.S. military action against Iran." Iranian forces themselves have previously targeted American interests, hitting U.S. bases in the Middle East, for instance, after top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani was killed in an American airstrike in Iraq in 2020. Iranian nationals have also carried out major cyberattacks. An Iranian national pleaded guilty last month to helping orchestrate the 2019 Baltimore, Maryland, ransomware attack that caused tens of millions of dollars in damage and disrupted critical city services. While prosecutors did not allege Sina Gholinejad was directed in his activities by the Iranian government, in announcing the case they warned more broadly of Iranian government-backed hacking groups targeting U.S. critical infrastructure. And in the summer of last year, the Justice Department also separately charged a Pakistani man with ties to the Iranian government for allegedly seeking to carry out political assassinations. Authorities told ABC News that among Asif Merchant's targets were Trump and other current and former U.S. officials.