House Commerce Advances AM Radio Vehicle Mandate Bill 45-2
The House Commerce Committee voted 45-2 Wednesday to advance the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act (HR-8449), as expected (see 2409170040). The panel's approval came after a lengthy debate over the proposed mandate that automakers include receiver technology in future electric automobiles. Several lawmakers voted in favor of HR-8449 but said more changes will be necessary before it reaches the floor. House Commerce later approved on voice votes amended versions of the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (HR-7890) and Kids Online Safety Act (HR-7891) after a sometimes emotional debate (see 2409180048). The panel at our deadline hadn't yet considered the Telehealth Modernization Act (HR-7623).
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.
Rep. John James, R-Mich., unsuccessfully sought an amendment to HR-8449 that called for sunsetting the proposed Department of Transportation AM radio mandate if the department or Government Accountability Office determined the rule was “no longer required to provide access” to Integrated Public Alert and Warning System communications. House Commerce rejected the proposal on a voice vote. It was identical to one that Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., intended to pursue during an aborted June markup of HR-8449 (see 2406270059). The panel approved a substitute amendment from ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., that clarifies the proposed mandate applies to “passenger motor vehicles” only.
James ultimately voted to advance HR-8449 without his amendment, but only after railing against imposing additional mandates that could “hamstring” the auto industry. “98% of new cars today already come with AM radio, and even if they were phased out from every single new vehicle today, it would take 30 years to have no AM radio” functionality, James said. It’s an “unnecessary mandate for a problem that doesn't exist.” Mandating “these receivers in every single car without knowing the consequences ... is a terrible precedent to set,” he said.
Reps. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, and Scott Peters, D-Calif., supported James’ amendment but later backed the bill without it. “AM radio is an important tool,” but “we're getting ahead of ourselves here,” Peters said. “We're mandating a legacy technology in perpetuity at a time when innovation and passenger vehicle technology is at its peak, and it sets a dangerous precedent to hinder American innovation in the future.” The amendment “will allow flexibility on the mandate and allow us to implement what the GAO finds out,” he said.
HR-8449 lead sponsor House Innovation Subcommittee Chairman Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and top Democratic co-sponsor Pallone strongly opposed James’ amendment. It would “unnecessarily” burden DOT, requiring that it “go through repeated and onerous review processes … without any additional funding to offset the strain on the agency,” Pallone said. If “at some point the evidence shows that AM radio ... [is] no longer necessary, I'm confident that this committee can and will come together again to address that issue at the appropriate time.”
Bilirakis: No Changes
Bilirakis later told us he would prefer the House move HR-8449 “as is,” with only Pallone’s amendment changing the underlying bill. “I'm willing to talk to anyone, because that's the way I am, but I think the [auto] manufacturers can work out” adapting to the mandate without James’ proposed sunset or additional DOT reviews, Bilirakis said. He claimed during the House Commerce debate that James’ amendment “substantially weakens the bill.”
House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., supported HR-8449 during the meeting but cautioned there’s “more work to do” before it reaches the floor. “We find ourselves in a balancing act between” maintaining Americans’ access to AM radio and protecting “our environmental health, technological innovation and sustainability goals” given “the electromagnetic noise generated by [electric vehicle] components can disrupt AM reception,” she said.
“We really need to look further” at whether imposing HR-8449’s mandate without a sunset is “really going to be a problem,” Matsui later told us. She wouldn’t say whether she prefers an alternative review proposal to what James sought, but “I want to make sure that we understand” AM radio’s importance in disseminating emergency information may not last “forever.” If “things change and connectivity gets better, ultimately, it's not going to be necessary,” she said.
NAB urged House Commerce members against backing James’ amendment ahead of the vote, in part arguing it “would allow repeal of DOT’s Rule without setting into place any viable alternative to ensure that Americans have access to emergency alerts.” The proposal also “fails to seek” Federal Emergency Management Agency views, leaving only DOT “to provide review and advice … without consulting the foremost agency authority on emergency management,” NAB said in a document we obtained. CEO Curtis LeGeyt later praised House Commerce for advancing the measure.
CTA CEO Gary Shapiro criticized House Commerce for advancing HR-8449, calling it an “historic first step … in mandating an ancient technology which burdens electric vehicles.” It “would stifle innovation, impose unnecessary costs on automakers, and increase prices for consumers,” Shapiro said in a statement. “This proposed legislation is like mandating fax machines on the International Space Station, and Congress should spend what little session time that remains addressing real problems.”