Jackson voters head to polls June 3 to choose next mayor. Here's who is on the ballot
In just a few days, voters in Jackson will return to the polls to elect the city's next mayor, closing out a months-long campaign that began earlier this year.
The June 3 general election will be the final step after a series of primaries and runoffs that narrowed the field from the original 20 candidates who qualified. Unlike previous elections, this one will be decided by whoever gets the most votes — there will be no runoff.
Incumbent Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba, who was pursuing a third term, was indicted on federal charges late last year but qualified to run in January, advancing to the Democratic runoff in April. Ultimately, Mississippi Sen. John Horhn, D-Jackson, secured a decisive victory in that runoff, positioning himself as the frontrunner for the June election.
Below is a look at the candidates who will be on the ballot on June 3, as well as their recent campaign finance reports, which were due Tuesday, May 27.
Information on candidates is derived from candidate questionnaires and interviews during the run-up to the election.
John Horhn, 70, a longtime Mississippi State Senator representing District 26 since 1993, is the clear front-runner in Jackson's mayoral race. Horhn has run for mayor three times previously, including recent campaigns in 2014 and 2017, but has yet to win. With decades of political experience and deep ties to Jackson, he is widely expected to win the upcoming June 3 election and lead the city.
Horhn studied English literature and dramatic arts at Centre College in Kentucky and pursued further education in community leadership at Jackson State University and Duke University. He is married to Lydia and has two children.
Horhn's campaign centers on reversing Jackson's decades-long population decline, which has seen about 60,000 people leave since 1980. He argues that improving basic services, such as streets, safety, water and infrastructure, is key to making the city a place where people want to live, work and invest. His legislative career includes helping bring millions in state and federal resources to Jackson, a track record he pledges to continue as mayor.
Horhn stresses the need to eliminate bureaucratic roadblocks to repairing streets and removing abandoned properties. Horhn also emphasizes healing the fractured relationship between city and state leadership to ensure better management of city assets and avoid future state takeover attempts.
Horhn said his approach is grounded in collaboration and accountability. He promotes building trust with residents and local leaders alike. He acknowledges that the city and council must move past personal conflicts to foster a team-building culture at City Hall focused on Jackson's best interests.
Horhn's experienced, pragmatic message and broad support have positioned him as the candidate most likely to become Jackson's next mayor.
According to his latest submitted campaign finance report, Horhn raised $116,586 between April 15 and May 27. During that same time period, Horhn spent $93,277.88. His report shows him with $23.308.12 on hand.
In total, Horhn has raised $350,030 this election and has spent $196,173.47, according to the report.
Horhn received a $5,000 donation, the largest in the report, this period from four donors: the Hern Law Firm, Landfair Solutions LLC, Brian Johnson and Billy Wayne Long. He also received a $2,500 donation from a political action committee called Capitol Resources Political Action Committee, which is associated with the local lobbying firm Capitol Resources LLC.
Kenneth 'Kenny' Gee, the lone Republican in Jackson's mayoral election, has been largely absent from public campaigning in recent weeks. Despite that, he remains on the ballot for the June 3 election.
Gee, 38, is a former law enforcement officer and a graduate of Bailey Magnet High School. He is currently enrolled at Rasmussen University and is the father of twin sons. He has not previously held elected office.
In earlier public statements, Gee said he is running to help Jackson reach its 'incredible potential,' with a focus on public safety, infrastructure and community well-being. His platform emphasizes investing in law enforcement, expanding youth mentorship and mental health programs, and revitalizing public spaces. He also voiced support for affordable housing and sustainable development.
To address state-city tensions, Gee proposed forming a City-State Relations Task Force to build trust and improve cooperation on shared goals such as infrastructure and economic growth.
Gee outlined a collaborative approach with the City Council, stressing data-driven policies and open dialogue. While he has not been actively campaigning, his name will appear on the ballot, and any votes cast for him will count.
Gee did not submit a campaign finance report on May 27.
Rodney DePriest, a former Clinton alderman and longtime Jackson resident, is running for mayor with a campaign focused on tackling violent crime and rebuilding the city's infrastructure.
DePriest, 58, has lived in Jackson for more than 30 years. He's a Mississippi College graduate and previously worked in construction and banking. He served two terms on the Clinton Board of Aldermen in the 1990s. He said his run for office is driven by faith.
At the center of his campaign is a group violence-intervention strategy. The goal is to bring police, faith leaders, community groups and residents together to directly engage with those responsible for most of the city's gun violence. Offenders would be warned of consequences but offered help — job training, education and social services — if they want to change. "Better Together" is DePriest's campaign slogan.
His second major priority is infrastructure. He wants to work closely with JXN Water and push for a long-term plan to improve roads and traffic flow. He proposes using a pavement management system to guide repairs and maximize use of state and local funds.
DePriest also says Jackson needs to improve its relationship with state leaders and, if elected, he said he'll bring a collaborative mindset to City Hall.
According to his latest campaign finance report, DePriest raised $89,325 this election, spending $72,349. The report says he has $16,976 on hand.
DePriest's largest donor is a Clinton-based company called HiJack LLC, an equipment rental company, according to the report. HiJack donated $10,000. DePriest also received a $6,000 donation from property management company MDMW Investments, which is based in Raymond. Multiple other businesses also donated $5,000 to DePriest's campaign.
Zach Servis, a 27-year-old musician, minister and entertainment professional, is running for mayor of Jackson with a platform centered on transparency in government, public safety and city services. Though he has no prior experience in elected office, Servis said he is ready to lead with bold ideas aimed at restoring trust in city leadership.
His plan starts with what he calls the 'three A's': accessibility, accountability and affordability. To improve safety, he wants to increase the Jackson Police Department's officer count to 400 and expand youth intervention programs. He also supports paving roads with longer-lasting cement, addressing potholes promptly, and syncing infrastructure repairs with JXN Water to avoid repeated street work.
On government access, Servis proposes moving city council meetings to the evening, responding to residents within 24 hours, and launching a city app that would let people directly message departments. He also wants to create a public dashboard showing spending, project timelines, and performance evaluations for city staff.
Servis said tackling corruption is the city's most urgent issue. He plans to bring audits up to date, launch a forensic audit of every department and make all contracts and budget records publicly available. He also wants to use AI tools to flag irregularities in city operations and record most city meetings for transparency.
To repair Jackson's strained relationship with the state, Servis said the city must demonstrate fiscal responsibility and offer clear plans for managing its own assets. While opposing state takeovers, he said Jackson should collaborate with state officials on shared goals.
Servis plans to meet regularly with city council members, involve them in planning before proposals reach the agenda and ensure high-quality presentations that inspire confidence and cooperation. His aim is to create a more open and responsive city government.
According to his recently submitted campaign finance report, Servis has received $2,290 in contributions, while spending $1,585. His reports shows $705 on hand.
A majority of Servis' campaign funds have gone towards purchasing yard signs and videography, according to the report.
Lillie Stewart-Robinson, a Jackson native, ordained minister and author, is running for mayor with a campaign centered on collaboration and inclusiveness. A graduate of Lanier High School, Jackson State University and New Foundation Seminary, Stewart-Robinson has not held elected office but said it's time for change in city leadership.
Her priorities include tackling youth crime, repairing infrastructure, revitalizing parks, boosting economic development and improving education. She wants to bring together a diverse group of voices — city officials, department heads, students, neighborhood leaders and state representatives — to develop strategies that address the city's most pressing challenges.
Stewart-Robinson emphasizes building strong relationships, especially between the city and state. She believes open communication and mutual respect are key to resolving conflicts and securing support for Jackson.
She also wants to work closely with the city council, inviting them and other stakeholders into ongoing conversations about how to improve city services and quality of life for residents. Her campaign is built on the idea that lasting solutions require everyone at the table, working together with a shared commitment to making Jackson a better, more inclusive city for all.
According to her recently filed campaign finance report, Stewart-Robinson has raised $1,391. The report only shows her contributions, she does not list what she has spent campaign funds on or how much cash she has on hand.
Stewart-Robinson's contributors include two donations of $65 and $50 from two individuals, as well as a $500 donation from a Carolyn Wilks. The contributions also show Stewart-Robinson gave a loan to herself for $776.40.
Although still listed on the ballot, conservative radio host Kim Wade is now urging his supporters to vote for fellow candidate Rodney DePriest in the June 3 general election.
Wade, known for the radio program "The Kim Wade Show," initially entered the race to challenge what he called 'mediocrity' and mismanagement in city leadership. He framed his campaign around restoring integrity and stewardship in Jackson's government, promising to stabilize city operations and improve long-term planning.
Wade's platform focused heavily on raising property values and investing in education. He argued that improving schools — whether public, private or charter — would help attract new investment and development, much like large economic projects in other cities.
He was critical of past mayors' handling of state-city relations, saying his administration would avoid state takeovers. To him, the root of many of Jackson's problems is a failure in leadership and basic governance.
Wade did not submit a campaign finance report.
This article originally appeared on Mississippi Clarion Ledger: Who is running for mayor of Jackson MS on June 3 2025?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Voting rights, access bills stopped in the Alabama Legislature
Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville (right, at lectern) raises his hand during a debate in the Alabama House of Representatives on March 6, 2025 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. Jackson filed an early voting bill this session, which was not considered by a committee, along with other voting-related bills. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector) A collection of bills aimed to enhance voting access in Alabama were never considered by committees during the 2025 legislative session, but advocates say the fight for enhanced voting rights in Alabama is not over HB 59, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville, would have required one early voting precinct in each county for one week before Election Day. According to a study by the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), about 70% of the ballots cast nationwide in 2020 were cast before Election Day, and 40% were cast before Election Day in 2016. In 2016, 25% of ballots nationwide were cast through early in-person voting, of the states that offer the option, according to the study. 'Senior citizens really brought it to my attention,' Jackson said in an interview on Monday. 'So I drafted it, and I put it the simplest way that I could do it: a week out before the election, four days prior to the elections, and nobody liked that. Republicans don't like that.' Alabama does not allow early voting and does not have no-excuse absentee voting. Amid the COVID pandemic in 2020, state leaders effectively allowed anyone to cast an absentee ballot, but that was rescinded after the election. The League of Women Voters of Alabama supported the measures. Kim Bailey, president of the league, said in an interview Thursday that the bills would expand access to voting in Alabama, which would increase voter turnout in the state. 'You can make a plan, but if something comes up on voting day, you may not be able to get to the ballot box,' Bailey said. 'Voting as a right and not a privilege. I think that's important that they'd be able to exercise that right.' In 2024, there were 3.7 million people registered to vote in Alabama, according to the Secretary of State's website. But only 2.2 million (59%) people voted in the 2024 Presidential election. That was significantly less than the national voter turnout of 88% in 2024, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and the lowest percentage of Alabama voters to cast ballots in a presidential election since 1988. The bill was assigned to the House Constitution, Campaigns and Elections Committee, but Rep. Bob Fincher, R-Woodland, chair of the committee, said he did not take HB 59 up in his committee because he is not in favor of early voting due to the cost to the state. 'It costs the state extra money when you vote early,' he said. 'If there's a change in the campaign, you cannot go back and change your vote.' The Legislative Services Agency did not provide a fiscal note for any of the election access related bills. Although a total cost is not available, Bailey said early voting would utilize state employees that are already working and would be held at locations that are already staffed. 'That wouldn't require a lot of infrastructure cost in those kinds of things, so depending on what the legislation that passes the cost could be not really very much,' Bailey said. Jackson said the potential cost to the state for a week of early voting would be much less than the cost to the state for unconstitutional bills and the congressional redistricting trial. In the state's General Fund budget, a $300,000 line item was added for 'reapportionment litigation fees.' 'We don't have an idea of the cost to the state. Look at all these lawsuits, these millions of dollars that are being paid to lawyers for these unconstitutional bills. That's a cost to the state,' Jackson said. 'See, they can come up with any excuse when they don't want something.' Jerome Dees, the Alabama policy director at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in an interview Thursday that he was not surprised the bills were not considered. He said the state has been regressing in voting access and inclusivity for the last decade. 'This bill is really kind of an effort to try and present a new vision of what democracy can and should be in Alabama, which is kind of the home of the civil rights movement,' Dees said. In fact, Dees said the state's congressional redistricting trial has highlighted the need for more voter protections and access. 'The fact that not a single one of these bills that aimed to expand voter access to create oversight over the redistricting process, whether that's at the municipal level, drawing of city council districts or at the state and federal level,' Dees said. 'According to the federal courts, is obviously a problem, just based on recent rulings. The fact that the Legislature intentionally chose not to touch any of those, I think, is as telling as anything.' In 2021, the Alabama Legislature approved congressional district maps that were later challenged in court and struck down in 2022 by a three-judge panel, which ordered the districts to be redrawn. In 2023, the Legislature redrew the maps, which were again challenged by plaintiffs for not meeting the court's requirement of allowing Black voters to elect a candidate of their choice in a second district. The court struck down the 2023 map passed by the Legislature and appointed a special master to submit three potential remedial maps in time for the 2024 election. The Alabama Attorney General's Office said last month the state may forgo drawing new congressional district maps before 2030 to prevent federal oversight of future redistricting, pausing the redistricting for five years. HB 97, sponsored by Rep. Kenyatté Hassell, D-Montgomery, would have allowed voters to cure their absentee ballot affidavit if they submit them before the election and the absentee election manager finds an error. Currently, the ballots are set aside and not counted if election officials find a defect with the affidavits. Hassell said in an interview on Wednesday that the bill would have given absentee voters a better chance for their ballot to be counted. 'People were making mistakes on their ballots, and even though they didn't know they made mistakes,' he said. 'We might have people who voted on an absentee ballot for the last 20 years, and their vote never counted because they made the same mistake over and over again not knowing they made that mistake.' The bill was assigned to Fincher's committee, but Fincher said he did not take it up because of conversations with Hassell and the Secretary of State Wes Allen. 'I've been very clear, I believe in Election Day, not Election month,' Allen said in a statement Monday. Hassell raised concerns that the executive branch had control over what bills did or did not get taken up in committee. 'When one person in the executive branch has an agenda, that shouldn't dictate if we all feel like this is a good piece of legislation that'll help the citizens,' Hassell said. 'That's why we have a House. That's why we have a Senate.' HB 31, sponsored by Rep. Adline Clarke, D-Mobile, allows people with a disability, or those unable to read or write, to designate someone to assist them with delivering an absentee ballot application or the absentee ballot itself, to the election manager. Messages seeking comment from Clarke were left Wednesday and Monday. Dees and Bailey expect the bills to be filed again for the 2026 Legislative Session. 'We're going to keep filing this year, I'm gonna keep filing until something happens,' Jackson said. 'We just have to keep hitting that rock until they crack. That's why I'm still pushing it, because it's the right thing to do, and the people of the state want it.'
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Advocates call on Michigan lawmakers to condemn ICE detention of Detroit student
Advocates are calling on Michigan lawmakers and school officials to condemn the immigration arrest of an 18-year-old Western International High School student. (Elaine Cromie / Chalkbeat) This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for Chalkbeat Detroit's free newsletter to keep up with the city's public school system and Michigan education policy. Maykol Bogoya-Duarte, an 18-year-old undocumented immigrant, had planned to return to Colombia with his mother after he graduated from Western International High School. With roughly one semester left in school, Maykol began making arrangements to leave the U.S. But his plans and his education were upended last month when he was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. Instead of finishing out his junior year this week, the teen is in custody of the federal government and faces an 'imminent' risk of deportation, according to his attorney. Immigration advocates are now calling on Michigan's governor, several Democratic members of the state's congressional delegation, and Detroit school district leaders to fight for Maykol's release so he can complete his schooling in the U.S. 'At this time of the year, students should be focused on graduation and summer,' said Ruby Robinson, senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, who is representing Maykol. 'And here we have a student on precious time who is being deported. He should be able to finish his studies.' Maykol is only 3.5 credits away from graduating, Robinson said, and would likely be able to finish school around the end of the calendar year. His attorney said he is asking to be released and granted a stay of deportation to see his studies through before returning to Colombia. Maykol was arrested on May 20 after he attempted to join a school field trip to Lake Erie Metropark, about 25 miles from Detroit. While driving with three other students in the car, Maykol was pulled over for tailgating another vehicle, said Robinson. The teen was asked to provide his driver's license but only had a City of Detroit identification card. Michigan does not currently issue driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants. The local police officers who pulled Maykol over could not speak Spanish and had trouble communicating with him, Robinson said, so they called Customs and Border Protection. 'An important aspect of this story is that local police, instead of relying on internal translation services, were relying on Border Patrol agents to interpret for them,' said Robinson. The practice of calling on Border Protection for traffic stops with people who can't speak English could be interpreted as racial profiling, the attorney said. Randy Krause, chief of the Rockwood Police Department, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Maykol, who came to the U.S. at 16, received a final deportation order in 2024. After that, Maykol was working with ICE and the Colombian Consulate to obtain the travel documents he needed to depart the country, according to his attorney. 'We were in compliance with their order,' said Robinson, adding the documents are required in order to board an airplane out of the country. 'It takes time for those documents to be generated.' He was still in the process of arranging to return to Colombia with his mother when he was arrested. It's unclear if he would have been able to graduate before leaving. On Monday afternoon, Robinson and Maykol's family didn't know where he was. They believed he was being moved from the Chippewa County Correctional Facility to another location early Monday morning, the attorney said. 'We expect when he does reach where he will spend the night tonight, we will be able to find him, or he will be able to make a phone call to us or his mom,' said Robinson. The attorney said because of the high number of people detained by ICE, the agency places them wherever bed space is available. 'We're seeing people detained in far parts of Michigan,' he said. 'We're also seeing people being sent to Ohio and other places as well.' By Monday afternoon, nearly 900 people had signed a petition asking Michigan officials to condemn Maykol's arrest, urge for him to be released to complete his high school education, and 'to put preventative policies in place to better support immigrant students and families.' Three advocacy groups — 482Forward, MI Students Dream, and the People's Assembly — created the petition. Lindsey Matson, the deputy director of 482Forward, said the advocacy effort is aimed at raising awareness of the issue and the petition, if it gains traction, will put pressure on those who have the power to intervene. 'Even a statement from the school board will be helpful,' Matson added. The petition calls for action from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, U.S. Sens. Gary Peters and Elissa Slotkin, U.S. House Reps. Shri Thanedar and Rashida Tlaib, and the Detroit Public Schools Community District. Thanedar, in a Monday evening post on X, formerly Twitter, responded to the detention, saying: 'ICE should not be detaining high schoolers! Maykol Bogoya-Duarte just needs 3 credits to graduate, but was put in detention by ICE. He should be released immediately and allowed to get his diploma.' Nikolai Vitti, superintendent of the district, told Chalkbeat last week that the school system's police department had advocated on the student's behalf. But the district did not notify students and families of the arrest because Maykol was not 'under the protection and responsibility' of the school system when ICE detained him, said Vitti. Robinson said notification about the incident or future instances like it would provide reassurances to families about how the district responds in these situations. 'I think people are looking for something like that from the school district,' said Robinson. In addition to advocating for Maykol's release to allow the teen to finish school, the attorney said the district should ensure its policies and practices support the needs of community members with immigration challenges. That includes making sure students and staff understand their rights in interactions with law enforcement, he added. In New York, the detention of a student has gained widespread attention and calls from advocates and political leaders for his release. (A second teen has since been detained.) Similarly, the detention of a teenager in Massachusetts prompted rallies. Less attention has been paid to Maykol's plight in comparison. Matson said his case isn't less important than what has happened in the other states. 'I feel like Democrats in Michigan have not really stood up for our immigrant population here,' she said. The advocacy groups calling for Maykol's release are asking community members to attend the Detroit Public Schools Community District board meeting at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday at Martin Luther King Jr. High School to urge school leaders to make public statements. Immigration advocates are also encouraging community members to call the offices of state and national lawmakers, as well as ICE. Lori Higgins is the Detroit bureau chief. You can reach her at lhiggins@ Hannah Dellinger covers K-12 education and state education policy for Chalkbeat Detroit. You can reach her at hdellinger@ Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.


Atlantic
35 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Red Tape Isn't the Only Reason America Can't Build
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 promote 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.