Wireless Legislative Package, Media Marketplace on Commerce Committees' September Radar

House Commerce is aiming to hold a hearing the last week of September on the media market, with the current target Sept. 26, said industry lobbyists. An email from House Commerce aides to stakeholders earlier this week noting plans for the hearing didn’t detail what issues would be in focus, but it’s likely to include a heavy emphasis on HR-6465, the lobbyists said. The bill, filed in late July by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., would repeal compulsory copyright licenses and retransmission provisions of the 1992 Cable Act and end Communications Act mandates on carriage and purchase of certain broadcast signals by MVPDs (see 1807230044).

Senate Commerce Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., told us his top telecom priority for September is to make additional progress on his work to combine the Streamlining the Rapid Evolution and Modernization of Leading-Edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance Small Cell Deployment Act and a set of other bills. S-3157, which Thune and Senate Communications ranking member Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, filed in June, aims to ease barriers by implementing a “reasonable process and timeframe guidelines” for state and local consideration of small-cell applications (see 1806290063). Thune has been aiming since July to develop a package that mixed language from S-3157 with elements of legislation with spectrum and encouraging 5G and broadband development (see 1807250056).

“I’d like to make it easier to build 5G networks” and “there are some pretty good ideas” on spectrum issues in other bills that would be a natural complement to S-3157, Thune said.

5G/Spectrum Combo

The shape of the potential legislative package is in flux and “depends a little bit” on how ongoing negotiations with critics of S-3157 progress in the weeks ahead, Thune said: “We’re still working with state and local governments to try and thread the needle” on their concerns about language to pre-empt state, local and tribal laws seen as barriers to deployments (see 1712070075 and 1804130057). “We’re seeing what we can get done” with the aim of attaching it to “some year-end vehicle,” likely during the lame duck, Thune said.

Communications sector lobbyists said candidates to advance with the spectrum legislation include the Advancing Innovation and Reinvigorating Widespread Access to Viable Electromagnetic Spectrum Act (S-1682) and the Supplementing the Pipeline for Efficient Control of the Resources for Users Making New Opportunities for Wireless Act (S-3010) as the likeliest to be included in a package. S-1682 and House companion HR-4953 aim to identify spectrum for unlicensed use and free up mid-band spectrum for wireless industry purchase via a future FCC auction (see 1708010069 and 1802070054). S-3010 and House companion HR-6017 would give federal agencies more flexibility in use of money from the Spectrum Relocation Fund to subsidize spectrum research and development (see 1806060060).

It’s “hard to know what’s possible” to achieve on S-3157 given local governments’ objections, but “we’re still listening to feedback,” Schatz told us. “We’re trying to see if there’s anything that can be done to allay their concerns or whether that’s irreconcilable.”

Public Knowledge is among those providing feedback on the spectrum bill, though PK isn’t taking a public position, said Senior Policy Counsel Phillip Berenbroick.

Slim Package Possible?

Thune and Senate Commerce Republicans are “trying to give Schatz some space to work through issues on his side of the aisle” to ensure any future hearing on S-3157 or a legislative package that includes its text doesn’t become partisan, a telecom lobbyist said. “They don’t want to put Schatz in a bind where it looks like he’s siding with Republicans against the rest of the Democratic caucus.”

Thune said he’s open to “possibly” moving a package of spectrum and broadband-related bills sans S-3157 if it becomes apparent he and other supporters can’t reach agreement with local and state governments that “respects their prerogatives” while also “creating incentives” for 5G investment. “We have” made some progress in those talks, and “we’re trying to gauge what the traffic can bear,” he said.

Local governments have seen some progress in negotiations with Thune and Schatz, but “there is still significant disagreement” over some of the remaining language in S-3157, including timeline guidelines for state and local consideration of small-cell applications, said a lobbyist for local governments. There are concerns the bill doesn’t adequately address how it would affect existing deals, the lobbyist said. Several lobbyists questioned the need to push forward on S-3157 given the lack of a House companion bill.

A spectrum and broadband legislative package is important, but Thune should consider jettisoning S-3157 if it appears to be a hindrance to legislative prospects, said Information Technology and Innovation Foundation Broadband and Spectrum Policy Director Doug Brake and others. It could be easier to move bills like S-1682 if Thune and Schatz decide not to combine them with S-3157, Berenbroick said. “It makes a lot of sense to combine these bills together and be effective in getting more done,” Brake said: Thune is “definitely warranted” in pursuing S-3157 as part of that package, but “if that ends up slowing down the spectrum bills, that would be unfortunate.”

Media Hearing TBD

Plans for House Commerce's media hearing remain up in the air.

House Commerce appears to be aiming to bring in witnesses outside of major companies and industry groups who would be “relitigating the same arguments” before Capitol Hill’s upcoming debate on Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization, one broadcasting lobbyist said. The pending STELA debate undoubtedly will affect the hearing’s focus by bringing retransmission consent issues “front and center,” a media lobbyist said. House Commerce “is examining these issues closely,” a spokeswoman said.

A media market hearing is needed “the sooner, the better,” before the formal start of the STELA debate, because “we need to educate people” on those issues, said broadcast consultant Preston Padden. The copyright license associated with STELA “is so old that most people don’t even know it exists, let alone what it does,” he said. A media lobbyist questioned the need to make it a major focus in the coming hearing, given uncertainty about which party will have majority control of the House after the election.

“Six months from now, Scalise may or may not” have a majority House leadership role that would improve his bill’s prospects, a media lobbyist opposed to the legislation said. If the Democrats gain control, a hearing on media issues now will have a “limited impact” on the direction of STELA reauthorization next Congress. HR-6465 “is about change and that is unsettling,” Padden said: “I think that explains the reaction of some people” to the bill.