Cruz, Pro-DOD Senators Tussle Over NDAA Language to Halt Military Spectrum Reallocation
A tug-of-war is continuing in the Senate over language from the FY 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (S-2296) that Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said last month would give the DOD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman excessive authority to veto commercial use of the 3.1-3.45 and 7.4-8.4 GHz bands (see 2509100064). The Senate Armed Services Committee approved the spectrum language in Section 1564, but Cruz filed an amendment in September to remove the proposal. He's also negotiating to remove it as part of a manager's amendment (see 2509110073). The House-passed FY26 NDAA (HR-3838) doesn't include similar language.
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!
Cruz told us Friday night that he's continuing to press for Armed Services leaders to remove the Section 1564 spectrum language in S-2296, but two of the committee's GOP members, who have been the most vocal advocates of DOD's airwaves interests in recent years, said they aren’t budging. Telecom-focused lobbyists said they believe the tussle may prove to be moot if Senate leaders can't reach a deal on a package of amendments to S-2296 needed to smooth floor action on the measure.
“There continue to be extensive conversations ongoing" about the spectrum language, Cruz said in a brief interview. He noted that the White House issued a formal statement in September indicating that President Donald Trump “unequivocally” opposes Section 1564. That statement said requiring the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman and DOD to certify that commercial use of the lower 3 and 7/8 GHz doesn't interfere with military incumbents “would hinder the President’s executive authority.” Republicans’ reconciliation package, previously known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, already exempts both bands from being eligible for reallocation as part of an 800 MHz spectrum pipeline (see 2507010070).
Cruz faces headwinds from two Senate Armed Services members -- Deb Fischer, R-Neb., who also chairs Commerce's Communications Subcommittee, and Mike Rounds, R-S.D. -- as well as Commerce ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. Cantwell objected to Cruz's request to jettison Section 1564, making it far harder for his push to be successful, lobbyists said. She told us she doubted the spectrum language is “something we [or other Democrats] would be willing to take out,” given that Fischer and Rounds “wanted it in” S-2296. Cantwell and other Democrats opposed the reconciliation package earlier this year, but she firmly backed a push from Fischer and Rounds to strengthen carve-outs for the lower 3 GHz and 7/8 GHz bands (see 2506120084).
Veto Supporters
Cantwell proposed four S-2296 amendments aimed at modifying the reconciliation package's spectrum language. One seeks to strip out a mandate that the FCC sell off 100 MHz from the 3.98-4.2 GHz upper C band. Another would exempt the 3.55-3.7 GHz citizens broadband radio service (CBRS) and 6 GHz bands from reallocation, something Cantwell sought in the lead-up to Senate passage of the reconciliation package. Her two other amendments would require the NTIA administrator to certify that reallocation for the 800 MHz pipeline doesn't “negatively impact” the missions of the FAA and NOAA.
Fischer and Rounds contend that S-2296's spectrum veto language isn't a departure from recent DOD policy. “It's just carrying on” from the framework during the Biden administration that the defense secretary and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman “sign off” on airwaves reallocations that could affect military incumbents, Fischer told us.
Rounds acknowledged that the White House “had some issues with” S-2296's existing Section 1564, but “I'm hoping those have been resolved.” He said he's not aware of any modification to the spectrum veto language, despite “hearing rumors” that Senate leaders were eyeing potential revisions. Several communications sector lobbyists told us the potential revisions would pull back from giving DOD unlimited power to block reallocations of the lower 3 and 7/8 GHz bands, but it would still essentially be a veto.
Digital Progress Institute President Joel Thayer said he doesn’t expect Section 1564 to make it into a final NDAA, regardless of whether Senate leaders remove it from S-2296. Fischer and Rounds “are going to pull every lever” available, but Trump’s support for 5G means he will remain “vehemently against” giving military leaders a unilateral veto, Thayer told us. He also doesn’t see House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., “wanting to pick a fight with Cruz” on the issue.
Michael Calabrese, director of New America’s Wireless Future Program, said Senate Armed Services members are pressing to keep Section 1564 because DOD is concerned about AT&T’s proposal to move CBRS operations to the lower 3 GHz band (see 2410090037), which would allow FCC reallocation of the 3.55-3.7 GHz frequency. Barring the lower 3 GHz band’s reallocation in NDAA would prevent an end run around the reconciliation package’s carve-out “that the FCC could do on its own authority,” Calabrese said. “The military believes that’s untenable” until there’s an automated dynamic sharing system in place that would make the Pentagon more confident.