Negative Reaction Continues to Any 5G Nationalization; Pai Says US Poised to Lead
Members of the FCC, Congress and industry continued reacting negatively Tuesday to any planned nationalization of 5G networks (see 1801290034). Mike O’Rielly and Brendan Carr weren't briefed by the administration on the plan, they said after the commissioners' meeting. “It didn’t seem like it went very well yesterday,” O’Rielly said of the release of the National Security Council memo. O’Rielly said the band in which the government would build the network, 3.7-4.2 GHz, has been the subject of extensive work by him to make it available for commercial use. “Whether that’s sufficient for running a full 5G network is unclear,” O’Rielly said. The initial 5G trials looked at 5G in high-frequency spectrum.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Telecom companies are making “massive investments” in 5G, with trials underway, and the FCC is doing what it can to encourage investment, Chairman Ajit Pai said. The U.S. seems to be leading the world on 5G, but that’s tough to quantify, he said. Pai was asked for additional comment on a leaked National Security Council memo that proposed the U.S. build a government 5G network to head off attempts by China to lead the world on the new standard. “I have consistently said that we want the United States to be the leader in 5G technology,” Pai said. “We want capital to be spent here. We want innovation to happen here.”
House Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., said Tuesday he's seeking a briefing with White House officials on their 5G work, including the NSC memo. “There may be security issues … that we all ought to be apprised of,” he said during a House Communications Subcommittee hearing Wednesday on broadband infrastructure legislation (see 1801300051). “I've asked for a briefing, either classified or not, to figure out what those issues are. We want to be smart about having a secure network for the newest innovation, but I don't think having the government run it is the best way to go.” Walden criticized the proposal Monday (see 1801290052).
The NSC “obviously has a high level of knowledge about what's going on out there in the cyber world, and I don't think they would just come up with this idea for fun,” Walden told us later. “It's appropriate as we go forward to make sure that there are adequate safeguards built into any network to protect U.S. citizens and others.” He wants “to find out what they know we don't know that led them” to write the nationalization proposal, believing “some of this discussion has occurred as FirstNet has been building out” its network. “There are ways” to “work through” potential cyberthreats to 5G “and put some safeguards in, but the government doesn't have to own” the network, Walden said.
House Communications Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., told reporters she “would have deep reservations” with a proposal that resembled the NSC memo because nationalizing 5G is “not something that I would be in favor of.” Subcommittee ranking member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., said the proposal "seems uninformed."
The last FCC chief also criticized the NSC proposal. “It is a breath-taking proposal from the King of the Deal’s White House!” Tom Wheeler blogged for Brookings. “Even European governments that formerly owned their telecommunications networks have recognized that state ownership is a disincentive to efficiency and technological progress.” Wheeler said the proposal could chill commercial investment in 5G. Matt Grob, Qualcomm executive vice president-technology, said at CES that China has moved earlier and more aggressively on 5G than it did in earlier generations of wireless (see 1801090016).