Eshoo Defends Support for T-Mobile/Sprint; Doyle Undecided

“What Sprint has is spectrum, but they don't have the capacity to build out” in a way that can effectively compete with larger carriers AT&T and Verizon, Eshoo told reporters Tuesday evening: “T-Mobile is the only one out there in the market that's really competing and competing hard. That is fabulous for consumers.” Though “it would be fair for anyone to say 'well, this takes the market from four to three'” major carriers, “I think it injects even more competition” into the wireless market, Eshoo said. T-Mobile “will make good use of spectrum, they're committed to” the USF Lifeline program, more jobs, 5G and increasing connectivity in rural areas, she said.

Eshoo's letter got criticism from groups opposed to T-Mobile/Sprint, most recently Fight for the Future. “This letter looks like it was written by a T-Mobile lobbyist,” said FFTF Deputy Director Evan Greer. “No elected representative in their right mind should be supporting a merger that will lead to higher cell phone bills and fewer jobs.” Greer said lawmakers' support for T-Mobile/Sprint isn't surprising because they “have collectively taken over $2.4 million dollars from [ISPs] over the years.” Free Press earlier pushed back against the letter.

“My record is replete with efforts relative to competition,” Eshoo told reporters. “I have just railed” in discussions with the House Commerce Committee “about why we don't have 100 percent of both sides of the aisle demanding competition” in the communications market. Free Press and others opposed to the takeover “are my friends and we have agreed 99.9 percent of the time,” she said. It's “all right” there isn't agreement on the deal. The competition that the deal will create “is essential,” Eshoo said. “Otherwise, we end up with a duopoly and that's not so great in our country. When capitalism is working well, the consumer gets a great deal.”

Doyle declared himself undecided on the transaction and unconcerned about Eshoo's stance. “Any member has a perfect right to write any letter they want,” he told reporters Wednesday. “I've been meeting with all sides," including T-Mobile CEO John Legere, “to get input … for and against” the deal. He said he soon will meet with the Communications Workers of America and others opponents.

During the coming hearing, “everybody's going to get a chance to tell their stories, why they're for and why they're against” the takeover, Doyle said. “Members can take that information” and determine their opinions. “That's why we have hearings, so that we can hear from the stakeholders and make decisions,” he said. “I've always thought hearings are important” and the pending panel is no exception, Eshoo said. “They're important for examination. There are people who perhaps haven't had time to examine [the deal] ahead of time."

It's unlikely the Senate Commerce Committee or its Communications Subcommittee will hold its own panel on T-Mobile/Sprint in the near future, subcommittee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., told us. Several Senate Commerce Democrats pushed for one (see 1901240040). The Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee held its hearing on the transaction last year (see 1806270068). “We're coordinating” with Senate Commerce Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and others on the telecom agenda and “there are some things he wants to tee up,” Thune said. “There's a good amount of stuff" that would likely take priority over examining the deal, including a Feb. 6 hearing on 5G deployment (see 1901300055).