When millions of Americans cast their ballots next week, the Affordable Connectivity Program won't be up for a vote, but the results could dictate whether we see an internet subsidy of its size again. 

The ACP was passed in 2021 as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, when Congress dedicated $14.2 billion to making the internet more affordable to low-income users. It gave low-income users $30 each month toward their home internet costs (or $70 for those living on tribal lands). In the same bill, Congress put $42.5 billion toward expanding internet infrastructure in rural areas. 

By the time it ended in May 2024, the ACP had enrolled more than 23 million households, including more than 10 million veterans.

The ACP was an acknowledgment of an underappreciated truth about the digital divide: Most Americans don't have an internet connection because it's too expensive, not because they can't access it.

"We're dedicating $42 billion toward making sure that the infrastructure exists, but we're not devoting anything towards the affordability barrier," Angela Siefer, executive director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, told CNET. "That's very lopsided and needs to be addressed."

Since it expired in May, several ACP extension bills have been introduced in Congress, but none have made it out of committee, even though the program is widely popular among voters. According to a poll taken in March, 78% of voters, including 64% of Republicans, 70% of independents and 95% of Democrats, support continuing the ACP. 

So why hasn’t an extension been passed if it's so popular? Part of the reason might be the election itself. 

"We've seen around broader budget fights that election-year politics can get in the way of a lot of the priorities Congress has, so it's unsurprising to see the delay," Amina Fazlullah, head of tech policy advocacy at Common Sense Media, told CNET. 

Most of the industry insiders I spoke with expressed skepticism about an ACP return anytime soon. 

One avenue for an extension might be pressure from internet providers themselves. Providers might not want to invest in building expensive broadband infrastructure if they don’t know that customers will be able to afford it once it’s complete. A study conducted by Common Sense Media found that the existence of the ACP reduced the per-household subsidy needed to incentivize providers to build in rural areas by up to 25% per year. 

"Anything is possible," Raza Panjwani, senior policy counsel at New America’s Open Technology Institute, told CNET. "I think we may also see a renewed focus on reviving the ACP if states see providers hesitate to compete for BEAD grants over take-rate concerns without the ACP." 

A source who spoke on condition of anonymity said permanent funding would be an essential condition for providers to support the program again. 

"What worries me is that this will just be piecemeal, $7 billion here, $7 billion there. But then we're always dependent upon the goodness of politics to refund and refresh ACP," Christopher Ali, professor of telecommunications at Penn State University, told CNET. "If we're serious about doing this, this needs to be a permanent budget item."

"Providers are counting on [the ACP] for their budgets, and more importantly, people are depending on it," Ali said. "We can't play politics with people's internet, and that's exactly what's been happening."

While both Republicans and Democrats have introduced ACP extension bills, Republicans have been in favor of narrowing its eligibility requirements. The ACP was open to anyone with an income at or below 200% of the federal poverty guidelines, or $60,000 for a family of four. 

Republican lawmakers argued in a letter to the FCC last year that "the vast majority of tax dollars have gone to households that already had broadband prior to the subsidy." ACP reform in a Republican Congress could narrow the income requirements to that of the Lifeline program. This federal subsidy provides $9.25 for phone or internet service and sets eligibility requirements at or below 135% of the poverty line, or $42,120 for a family of four. 

"There would likely be what you might think of as a merger of the ACP and the Lifeline program," Blair Levin, a former chief of staff at the FCC and a telecom industry analyst at New Street Research, told CNET. "I think it would include certain changes in ACP that are consistent with what the Republicans in the Senate wanted relative to eligibility criteria. So it would be a reduced program."