Senators Aligned on Need for Spectrum Legislation

“We learned about the history of it today, and now we need to start talking about the future,” Thune told reporters after the hearing. He suspected additional hearings will come in the fall time frame potentially and “in terms of a rollout of a piece of legislation, we’ll probably wait” until that hearing process concludes, he said. “I suspect it gets attached to some vehicle,” Thune said of eventual legislation. “It’d ... probably be hard to move stuff like this as a free-standing bill.” It’s possible spectrum legislation would get attached to a broader telecom rewrite from within Commerce or to some other legislative vehicle from elsewhere, he said.

“I think for our spectrum needs we have to look at all of them,” Baker said of the current Commerce measures, encompassing the Wireless Innovation Act (S-1618), Wi-Fi Innovation Act (S-424), Federal Spectrum Incentive Act (S-887) and the Rural Spectrum Accessibility Act (S-417). Baker also backs an update to the Spectrum Relocation Fund. “There needs to be money for the agencies to do technical deployment,” she said, backing funding for that expertise within agencies to test, review and strategize about spectrum. “There’s not money for that right now.” Those agencies need to be able to do that research when not "under the gun" of having to move spectrum bands, she said. The proceeds for such activities could come from AWS-3 revenue, she said.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who introduced the Wireless Innovation Act and Wi-Fi Innovation Act, didn’t attend the hearing. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, another Commerce member who didn’t attend, co-sponsors Rubio’s Wireless Innovation Act, as do several other Commerce Committee Republicans.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., backer of the Wi-Fi Innovation Act, blasted what he saw as “such an overreaction” from those in the automotive industry who oppose the bill. It would direct the FCC to test the upper 5 GHz band for its sharing potential. Automotive interests hold the spectrum currently with an eye toward connected vehicle technology, and they argue no legislation is necessary. The Wi-Fi Innovation Act would simply direct the FCC to “just take a look” at the upper 5 GHz band, Booker said, urging people to “just read the bill.” Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., disputed the merits and said he appreciates the committee “slowing down that process” of advancing the Wi-Fi Innovation Act. He lauded connected vehicle technology and insisted “we have to get this right” and said “we don’t need additional legislation at this point.”

Rosenworcel likes the bill, she told Booker, and is optimistic there’s a way forward. She said she appreciates that some testing is happening now and thinks “there’s other tests we can run.” The legislation “encourages tests, and I think that is a smart and prudent course,” Rosenworcel said. “The commercial world’s working really well,” Baker said in response to Peters’ comment about no need for further legislation. House lawmakers have convened meetings to further voluntary testing (see 1505270044).

Democrats and Republicans were aligned in saying more spectrum is needed and backed the idea of legislation. “We should fully embrace spectrum sharing when we cannot allocate the spectrum,” said Commerce Committee ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla. “Spectrum legislation is not only necessary but has traditionally been bipartisan. There is no better evidence than the 2012 [Spectrum] Act.” This committee should have the same “leadership and consensus” as what produced that act, Nelson said.

An “aggressive plan” is required, said Communications Subcommittee ranking member Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. “Spectrum policy is one area where there’s a real opportunity for bipartisan consensus. … We share common goals for this pipeline.” Both Nelson and Schatz urged a balanced approach that involves unlicensed use of spectrum. Schatz focused his questioning on the delay in reallocating spectrum for wireless, which can take 13 years. “Thirteen years is not going to cut it,” Schatz said. “The shortest time it’s been has been six years; the longest is 13,” Baker said. “It’s getting better.” Digging into these different proposals -- providing incentives for the federal agencies to vacate spectrum, improving wireless siting issues on federal lands -- should “help in shortening the period of time,” Baker said. Schatz referred to what he judged the “misalignment of incentives” involved and the need to truly incent federal agencies to forsake the spectrum. “They know that billions of dollars of revenue are on the table,” Schatz reflected. “They could say, ‘Maybe it should substantially be our revenue.’”

Federal agencies need to "internalize the cost of the spectrum they use,” Rosenworcel said, agreeing on the need for incentives so federal occupants can see the merits of moving. Schatz worried about the length of time required in any efforts and considered how Congress could “orchestrate an agreement in the short run to make sure this happens in a reasonable timeframe,” he said. “We all understand the misalignment of incentives is the basic problem, and we can solve that.”

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., backed the Federal Spectrum Incentive Act, saying cellphone coverage can fall short, which is “driving me crazy.” Rosenworcel and Baker “both have praised that bill,” Baker said. Rosenworcel agreed the legislation represents “a terrific idea.” They also cited shortcomings in scoring auctions. The Congressional Budget Office “suggested as a result of the cost of relocation, that [AWS-3] auction would net out to zero dollars,” Rosenworcel said, contrasting that with the tens of billions of dollars actually raised in last year's AWS-3 auction. She and Markey pointed out the scoring may be out of date. “Sometimes the agencies get behind,” Markey said.

Witnesses Blair Levin of the Brookings Institution and Technology Policy Institute President Thomas Lenard mentioned the importance of the mobile satellite service spectrum (MSS), much of which is held by LightSquared. “Because it is already licensed and doesn’t need to be auctioned, the MSS spectrum could be deployed for mobile broadband more quickly than other spectrum blocks,” Lenard said. LightSquared “totally agrees with these remarks,” a company spokeswoman told us after the hearing. That spectrum is the “mid-town Manhattan real estate of wireless broadband,” she said. LightSquared is working with GPS stakeholders for a “win-win resolution of all technical issues” on receiver design and network construction and those involving the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (see 1501270049), she said.

“We need to look at spectrum all the way up to 24 GHz and maybe even as high as 90 GHz," Rosenworcel said. "If we combine wide channels from these stratospheric frequencies with dense networks of small cells we can overcome propagation challenges and deliver wireless service at faster speeds than ever before.” Any legislative effort needs "a cut for unlicensed -- call it the Wi-Fi dividend," she added.

Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., has discussed spectrum issues with Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, Udall told the witnesses. “I plan to push for a spectrum challenge prize,” giving a monetary award for those who can make spectrum use more efficient, he said.