House Commerce Advances AM Radio Vehicle Mandate 50-1
The House Commerce Committee voted 50-1 Wednesday to advance a revised version of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act (HR-979), despite some members’ misgivings about including a shorter sunset period as a compromise with pro-automotive industry lawmakers. HR-979 and its Senate Commerce Committee-advanced companion, S-315, would require the Department of Transportation to mandate that future automobiles include AM radio technology, mostly affecting electric vehicles (see 2502100072). The bill’s supporters unsuccessfully tried to attach it to a December 2024 continuing resolution to extend federal appropriations (see Ref:2412180033]).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
House Commerce adopted a substitute amendment for HR-979 that changed the proposed sunset from 10 years to eight years after enactment and reduced the amount of time before automakers would need to comply with the DOT rule to two years. The substitute also said that before issuing the rule, DOT must submit a report to House and Senate Commerce that evaluates the “potential adverse impacts” that AM radio signals could have on the safety and innovation of autonomous vehicles. HR-979 lead sponsor and House Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade Subcommittee Chairman Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., said the amendment “represents a bipartisan agreement and a compromise across industry.”
House Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., and ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., emphasized to members who questioned the substitute amendment’s changes that they were necessary to ensure HR-979 gets a floor vote. “My understanding is that this bill will not move to the floor unless it contains” the revised sunset, Pallone said. Guthrie said panel leaders aimed to “split the difference” between the 10-year expiration date and stakeholders who wanted it even shorter “because technology changes so quickly.”
Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., who was skeptical of HR-979’s earlier iteration during the last Congress (see 2306060088, indicated she was “very supportive of” the substitute amendment. “Automakers and their CEOs … told me directly that they would continue offering [AM radio] in their vehicles and work in good faith with us on a path forward,” she said. “They kept their word.”
Reps. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y., Jennifer McClellan, D-Va., and Randy Weber, R-Texas, were among those who groused about the eight-year sunset. “I think this needs to be something that goes on and should be made permanent,” Langworthy said. McClellan said that “while it would be nice to not have a sunset at all, a sunset is appropriate to at least look and see if technology changes.” Weber said he was “glad that all the weather experts have determined that after eight years, we'll have no more storms” that will require emergency alerts that AM radio transmits.
EV Concerns
Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., was the only House Commerce member to vote against HR-979. He also opposed a previous iteration of the bill during the last Congress (see 2409180047). Even with changes, the legislation still “forces American consumers to buy a product that they may or may not want” in AM radio, Obernolte said. “In the past, that has not been a big deal because the incremental cost of including an AM radio on a conventional vehicle is very low, [but] that is not true” now, given the Center for Automotive Research estimates “that just complying with this bill would cost about $3.8 billion over the next several years.” He said automakers would likely pass that cost “on to consumers in the form of higher prices on electric vehicles.”
House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., supported HR-979 but also noted the potential impact of the mandate on automakers. Requiring AM radio in electric vehicles “poses a sticky technological challenge [without] a quick or easy fix,” she said. “Our work is far from complete. I am committed to finding solutions that balance these two essential priorities: emergency communications and sustainability.” Matsui faulted the Trump administration for “destroying our public safety communications infrastructure, including gutting public media funding and federal disaster response agencies like" the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
NAB and the National Religious Broadcasters, leading supporters of HR-979/S-315, hailed House Commerce’s advancement of the measure. The panel's near-unanimous vote “sends a clear message: AM radio remains essential to public safety, and every American deserves access to it in their car,” said NAB CEO Curtis LeGeyt. “We urge House and Senate leadership to move swiftly to pass” it.
“For the first time, we have a bipartisan consensus bill that can realistically clear both chambers and reach [President Donald Trump’s] desk,” said Nic Anderson, NRB's vice president of public policy.
Meanwhile, the musicFIRST Coalition urged lawmakers to continue seeking simultaneous passage of HR-979/S-315 and the American Music Fairness Act (HR-861/S-326), which would levy a performance royalty on stations playing music on terrestrial radio. Democrats' attempt to tie the bills' political fortunes together prevented the vehicle mandate’s passage in the 2024 continuing resolution.
The U.S. is “the only democracy in the world that refuses to pay artists when their songs play on the radio,” musicFIRST said. “That is wrong. Even Russia and China pay artists when their songs are on the air. As lawmakers advance legislation to save AM radio, we ask that they remember the artists who make radio possible in the first place and pass” HR-861/S-326.