House Commerce Leaders Divide Over GOP Interest in Tax Cut-Focused Spectrum Proposal
House Commerce Committee leaders drew battle lines during and after a Thursday Communications Subcommittee hearing over GOP proposals to move spectrum legislation as part of an upcoming budget reconciliation package (see 2501070069). House Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone of New Jersey and other Democrats strongly objected to using reconciliation as a spectrum vehicle because it would allocate future license sales revenue to fund tax cuts instead of telecom priorities. Lawmakers from both parties again cited long-standing DOD objections to repurposing the 3.1-3.45 GHz band and other military-controlled frequencies as a continued flashpoint in spectrum legislative talks in this Congress (see 2501070069).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
House Communications Vice Chairman Rick Allen, R-Ga., signaled strong GOP interest in using license sales to pay for tax cuts by announcing he had filed a 2025 House version of the 2024 Spectrum Pipeline Act, which Senate Commerce Committee now-Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, originated (see 2403110066]). Allen later confirmed to us that his bill mirrors the earlier Cruz proposal and said he coordinated with the senator on its language. The measure would restore the FCC's lapsed auction authority through Sept. 30, 2027, and proposes requiring that NTIA identify at least 2,500 MHz of midband spectrum to reallocate within the next five years.
Allen told us he thinks House Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., “is open to” basing a reconciliation airwaves title on the 2025 Spectrum Pipeline Act. Allen pointed to the proposal during the House Communications hearing as “designed to ensure the efficient allocation of midband spectrum, a resource critical to the advancement of 5G and next-generation technologies.” He drew an endorsement from hearing witness and CTIA Executive Vice President Brad Gillen, who said it would “equalize” the current “imbalance” between 5G and unlicensed spectrum. CTIA CEO Meredith Baker later praised Allen for filing the measure, as did Wireless Infrastructure Association CEO Patrick Halley, AT&T and the Competitive Carriers Association. Spectrum for the Future criticized the bill.
House Communications Chairman Richard Hudson, R-N.C., told us that he hadn't looked at Allen's updated version of the Spectrum Pipeline Act and that “we're just beginning the discussions” on what a reconciliation spectrum title might include. Guthrie straddled the fence between using reconciliation to just renew the FCC's mandate or also obligate specific bands’ reallocation. He called auction reauthorization a “first step,” to be followed by working “together with federal agencies and stakeholders to reallocate unused spectrum.” The federal government must also “look at innovative tools to better utilize and manage spectrum resources,” Guthrie said.
Pallone criticized House Republicans for “considering using spectrum auction proceeds as a piggy bank to fund their costly tax breaks for billionaires and large wealthy corporations. I hope they reconsider going down this road, because it would be a sharp departure from the way spectrum policy and auction proceeds have been handled by Congress in the past.” He cited previous proposals to use spectrum proceeds to pay for next-generation 911 technology upgrades and stopgap funding for the FCC’s lapsed affordable connectivity program. Public Knowledge CEO Chris Lewis supported Pallone.
'Glass Houses'
House Communications ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., said spectrum “is a public good, and I'm dismayed to see proposals floated that would use auction proceeds to provide tax cuts for the wealthy through reconciliation.” House Communications should instead “use these funds to close the digital divide, protect national security and support public safety communications.” She noted Congress agreed in December, as part of the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, that the FCC reauction 197 returned AWS-3 licenses to offset $3.08 billion in additional funding for the FCC’s Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program (see 2412240036).
Matsui later told us she and Hudson agreed during a prehearing meeting that they would try “to work as bipartisanly as possible” on spectrum issues, but she emphasized that using licensing revenue to pay for tax cuts is “not the way I look at this at all.” Hudson said that Democrats concerned about redirecting spectrum proceeds away from paying for telecom projects and instead offsetting tax cuts were “living in glass houses and throwing stones.” Congressional Democrats “had an opportunity in the last Congress” to pass legislation like the House Commerce-approved 2023 Spectrum Auction Reauthorization Act, which would have used sales revenue to pay for their priorities, “and they didn’t,” Hudson said. “It’s up to Republicans now to find a path forward.”
Hudson was among several lawmakers from both parties who mentioned DOD either directly or by implication as a factor in developing spectrum legislation. He noted that Fort Bragg in his district is “the epicenter of the universe.” Congress “and the White House need to take a leadership role” in repurposing federal spectrum, since agencies “are not actively looking for ways to be more efficient with their spectrum” holdings, he said.
Rep. Darren Soto, D-Fla., expressed impatience with DOD’s “hesitancy” about allowing the federal government to repurpose some spectrum. Open RAN Policy Coalition Executive Director Diane Rinaldo told Soto “there’s a lack of trust” between DOD and other spectrum users that the federal government needs to resolve “because we’re all one country.”