Waxman Sees No Prospects for GOP Lifeline Budget Cap Legislation

Democrats rejected the legislation, introduced by Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., who isn't on the subcommittee, and attacked Republicans for lacking empathy for the low-income people who subscribe to the Lifeline program. Henry Waxman, an ex-lawmaker from California who spent 40 years in the House and led Commerce Committee Democrats last Congress, told us the legislation will likely go nowhere.

“I don’t think it makes political sense for Republicans to look like they’re hurting poor people,” said Waxman, who since leaving Capitol Hill began lobbying for clients including TracFone Wireless and T-Mobile, in an interview after the subcommittee markup. “They spend their time passing bills that go nowhere when they line up on a partisan basis.”

The Lifeline program previously had “legitimate” problems but the FCC has “made significant improvements,” Waxman said, citing third-party eligibility verification and expanding the service to broadband. “The FCC rejected the idea of a cap,” Waxman said, saying his strong personal feelings for the issue compelled him to speak. “A cap would mean it couldn’t expand the program. I don’t understand why the bill is being proposed in light of the FCC’s actions.” The rhetoric on Lifeline is partisan and “consistent” with past battles over the program when he was a lawmaker, Waxman said. He speculated Republican lawmakers may want to show their constituents they can advance the measure: “I don’t think they’re doing it with the expectation it becomes law.”

“You don’t like the FCC, that’s one thing,” subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., told her GOP colleagues during the markup. “Why are you punishing our own constituents? … Or do they have second- or third-class citizenship?” She wondered how subcommittee members would fare without smartphones. “Just because someone is poor, they shouldn’t be kicked,” Eshoo said. “I don’t think this is in your DNA, Mr. Chairman. … Why are we hurting these people? What did they ever do to you? … Don’t do this! You’re going to be taking 911 service from them…. We’re better than this. We really are better than this.”

Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., scoffed at what he said were various Democratic amendments that were “all basically the same thing” and meant to delay imposing any cap. He takes “a little offense” at the idea that subcommittee Republicans are against helping poor people, he said. Republicans shot down all Democratic amendments except one from Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., which was incorporated by voice vote. The Yarmuth amendment would direct a GAO study on how a Lifeline cap would affect waste, fraud or abuse in the program.

Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., dismissed the legislation as “an ax” and questioned the underlying premise. “What I hear the chairman saying is that this bill is designed to try to force some kind of action to prevent fraud and abuse,” Pallone said. “But I don’t see any way a cap is going to accomplish that. I really don’t.”

Walden also criticized the process surrounding a failed bipartisan FCC Lifeline compromise that would have set a $2 billion budget cap at the FCC during its March 31 meeting. Several subcommittee Democrats opposed such a cap in a letter to the FCC that day. “Somehow they delayed the vote for three hours … while the agreement fell apart,” Walden said. “What happened behind those closed doors? I don’t know. But it’s unfortunate.” He said the $1.5 billion cap in the legislation is “not an insignificant amount of subsidy” and argued the bill isn't “an ax to this program.”

Walden questioned the timing of the FCC’s proposed $51 million fine for Total Call Mobile, released just after the FCC’s vote to overhaul Lifeline (see 1604080032). He cited a 2014 subpoena, saying the FCC may have waited for political reasons. “Most of the fraud, they will not go after it,” he said, citing the statute of limitations and concerns from Commissioner Ajit Pai.

It’s “not clear” that the FCC could have moved faster, Pallone countered, saying the FCC collected documents as recently as December and citing a time frame determined by the FCC inspector general’s office. No lawmaker supports waste, fraud and abuse, Eshoo said: “Every dollar is really precious, and in this program, it’s extra precious. Why? Because these are the poorest people in the country. I know that every time the oracle, Mr. Pai, speaks, everybody jumps up and down.”

“Is there any cap number you would support?” Walden pressed Eshoo later. “I’d sit down and talk about it,” Eshoo replied, wondering about the people who may be cut off due to the cap number now. Walden was dubious Democrats would ever accept any cap. GOP Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., a subcommittee member, said a cap would actually help low-income people. “Let’s put some kind of cap in place so the taxpayer’s protected,” Scalise said, saying the FCC views Lifeline as a “slush fund.”

Lawmakers are still debating provisions of the Kelsey Smith Act (HR-4889) and Kari’s Law Act (HR-4167) as they advance to full committee markup. Pallone offered an amendment to the Kelsey Smith Act that would have restored the bill to the version approved by the Commerce Committee last Congress. Walden opposed it, saying Republicans are modeling it after what passed in Oregon and calling it “balanced.” Republicans defeated Pallone’s amendment but approved Walden’s expected liability protection amendment.

Eshoo offered a location accuracy amendment to Kari’s Law, which would address direct 911 dialing, but withdrew it after Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., said they would work together on the issue. “It’s got great merit to it,” Shimkus said of Eshoo’s idea. “I think it’s something that I think if we give it some time, we can bring a bipartisan amendment if we do due diligence and look at the language.” The subcommittee cleared HR-4889 and HR-4167 despite the concerns from Democrats.

Lawmakers cleared the Rural Health Care Connectivity Act (HR-4111), the Spectrum Challenge Prize Act (HR-4190), Securing Access to Networks in Disasters Act (HR-3998) and Anti-Swatting Act (HR-2031) by voice vote with no partisan disagreements. A GOP spokesman didn’t say when the full Commerce Committee markup will occur.