NATOA, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and two more local government groups reinforced their opposition (see 2311060069) to the House Commerce Committee-cleared American Broadband Deployment Act (HR-3557) Wednesday. House Commerce last year advanced the measure, a package of GOP-led connectivity permitting revamp measures, without Democratic support (see 2305240069). NCTA and nine other communications industry groups urged House leaders last month to defeat the measure before the end of this Congress (see 2409050035). HR-3557 “represents an unprecedented and dangerous usurpation of local governments’ authority to manage public rights-of-way and land use,” NATOA and the other groups said in a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. The National Association of Counties and National League of Cities also signed. They noted the bill “favors a model for local permitting that unfairly constrains local input and threatens to undo significant local coordination efforts that have occurred across the country to prepare and act upon this historic moment in federal broadband infrastructure investment.” In “return for these gifts, the bill imposes no obligations on cable, wireless, and telecommunications companies to provide broadband to ‘unserved’ and ‘underserved’ Americans and, further, passes on the real cost of deployment to already overburdened American households,” the groups said: “That such flawed legislation has moved as far as it has may be attributed to the fact” House Commerce moved HR-3557 “without the benefit of local government testimony nor insights and consequences of the proposed fundamental changes to our nation’s telecommunications policy and rights-of-way authorities.”

The House approved the Future Uses of Technology Upholding Reliable and Enhancing Networks Act (HR-1513) Wednesday on a lopsided 393-22 vote. The measure would direct the FCC to establish a 6G task force that provides recommendations about ensuring U.S. leadership in developing that technology’s standards. The House originally intended to consider HR-1513 last week (see 2409060053). HR-1513 lead sponsor House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Doris Matsui, D-Calif., hailed approval of the measure. “We stand at a crossroads for the future of global innovation leadership” and the “economic and national security stakes in the race to 6G couldn’t be higher,” she said in a statement. “For the [U.S.] to stay the gold standard in wireless communications technology, we need to look forward and convene our best and brightest innovators to map the road ahead.” HR-1513 “will accelerate us down this path, making a crucial down payment on American leadership by taking steps forward as this technology evolves.” The House approved the Senate-passed Launch Communications Act (S-1648) Tuesday night on a voice vote (see 2409160056). The measure, which the Senate passed in October, and House-approved companion HR-682 would require that the FCC streamline the authorization process for commercial launches’ access to spectrum (see 2307260037).

The House plans to vote as soon as Tuesday night on the Senate-passed Launch Communications Act (S-1648) under suspension of the rules. The measure, which the Senate passed in October, and House-approved companion HR-682 would require the FCC to streamline the authorization process for commercial launches’ access to spectrum (see 2307260037).

House Administration Committee ranking member Joseph Morelle, D-N.Y., offered “strong support” Monday for FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel's embattled AI political ad disclosures NPRM (see 2407250046). Morelle and other House Democrats previously supported the proposal during an event last week but indicated they would like the FCC to go further on AI regulation if Congress can delegate that authority to the agency (see 2409110065). “I commend the [FCC] for taking this necessary step towards regulating the use of AI in political communications, as the absence of effective guardrails presents a clear and present danger to the information ecosystem in the upcoming election,” Morelle said in a letter to Rosenworcel that we obtained. He would also back the FCC engaging in “future rulemaking to regulate this technology in political communications.” The “current lack of regulation that specifically addresses political advertisements could easily be exploited by candidates for office and dark money groups attempting to confuse and manipulate voters,” Morelle said: Political “candidates have already attempted to manipulate voters by using AI” and its use “in campaign advertisements will only increase” as the Nov. 5 election approaches. “The American public deserves to know whether the political advertisements they see on television or hear on the radio have been manipulated by generative AI,” he said. “Campaign-related disclosures, like those in the Proposed Rule, are critical to ensuring that voters” are fully informed. “Deterring the untoward use of AI by bad actors for political gain during this and future election cycles requires a whole-of-government approach, and I hope that other agencies will soon follow.”

The House Innovation Subcommittee plans a Sept. 19 hearing contrasting current and past FTC practices with an implied aim of criticizing Chair Lina Khan's role in the alleged changing of commission norms. Subpanel Republicans criticized Khan's actions during a July hearing focused on the FTC's FY 2025 budget request (see 2407090044). The Sept. 19 hearing will begin at 10:30 a.m. in 2322 Rayburn, the Commerce Committee said Thursday night. The FTC’s monthly meeting is set for 11 a.m. the same day. The commission “has a long, bipartisan history of protecting consumers, without unduly burdening legitimate business activity,” said House Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., and Innovation Chairman Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla. “Unfortunately, in recent years, we have seen the Commission take a different approach when it comes to its historical norms.” That perceived “shift raises questions on its preparation for rulemakings, its retention of staff, and the long-term impact on its effectiveness in sustaining court challenges,” the GOP leaders said: “We look forward to a conversation with experts on how the FTC’s departure from its traditional standards is affecting Americans in their daily lives, consumer safety, and American businesses across the country.”

The House approved the Removing Our Unsecure Technologies to Ensure Reliability and Security Act (HR-7589) and three other telecom security-focused measures Monday night on voice votes. The other bills were the: Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act (HR-820), Countering CCP Drones Act (HR-2864) and Securing Global Telecommunications Act (HR-4741). The House this week was also slated to vote under suspension of the rules on the Future Uses of Technology Upholding Reliable and Enhancing Networks Act (HR-1513) (see 2409060053), but lawmakers didn’t offer the measure for debate Monday night. House Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., hailed House passage of HR-820, HR-2864 and HR-7589, which the panel cleared in March (see 2403200076). “China is America’s greatest adversary and poses significant risk to our national and economic security,” she said in a statement. HR-820, HR-2864 and HR-7589 will “advance American competitiveness and global technological leadership, ensuring that America -- not China -- is setting the rules of the road for the technologies of tomorrow.”

The House plans to vote as soon as Monday night, under suspension of the rules, on the Future Uses of Technology Upholding Reliable and Enhancing Networks Act (HR-1513) and four telecom security-focused measures. Other bills on the House’s suspension docket: the Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act (HR-820), Countering Chinese Communist Party Drones Act (HR-2864), Securing Global Telecommunications Act (HR-4741) and Removing Our Unsecure Technologies to Ensure Reliability and Security Act (HR-7589). The House Commerce Committee unanimously advanced HR-820, HR-1513, HR-2864 and HR-7589 in March (see 2403200076). HR-820 would require that the FCC publish a list of communications companies with agency licenses or other authorizations where China and other foreign adversaries’ governments hold at least a 10% ownership stake (see 2210250067). HR-1513 would direct the FCC to establish a 6G task force that provides recommendations about ensuring U.S. leadership in developing that technology’s standards. HR-2864 would add Chinese drone manufacturer Da-Jiang Innovations (DJI) to the FCC’s covered entities list. HR-4741 would require that the State Department develop a strategy promoting the use of secure telecom infrastructure worldwide. HR-7589 would direct the Commerce Department to “specify what transactions involving routers, modems, or devices that combine a modem and a router are prohibited” under a 2019 executive order by then-President Donald Trump that barred transactions involving information and communications technologies that pose an “undue risk of sabotage to or subversion of” U.S.-based communications services (see 1905150066).

CTIA, Incompas, NCTA, the Wireless Infrastructure Association and six other communications industry groups urged House leaders Thursday that they should “prioritize consideration” of the House Commerce Committee-cleared American Broadband Deployment Act (HR-3557) “in the final months of this Congress.” House Commerce last year advanced HR-3557, a package of GOP-led connectivity permitting revamp measures, without Democratic support (see 2305240069). Some local government advocates have since also vocally opposed HR-3557 (see 2311060069). Congress’ bid to achieve the “goal of universal connectivity” via the $65 billion it allocated in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act “will ultimately be limited unless certain barriers are removed today,” the industry groups said in a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. The measure “would go a long way to address these barriers” by mandating “clear and streamlined” rules that will prevent permitting bottlenecks. The groups cited language in HR-3557 that “will codify several deployment streamlining orders and interpretations that the FCC has adopted over the past ten years," including the commission’s 2018 order that removed local barriers to small-cell deployment (see 1803220027). The bill also “takes proactive steps to improve siting on federal lands and reduce unnecessary red tape for applications to deploy or improve communications networks,” the industry groups told Johnson and Jeffries.

The Congressional Research Service predicts the U.S. Supreme Court’s June Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo ruling (see 2406280043) and “uncertainty about the scope of the FCC’s authority and ability to adopt regulations in the public interest” could prompt congressional legislation "to clarify the agency’s statutory authority.” Conversely, lawmakers could also maintain “the status quo and let ambiguities regarding the FCC’s rulemaking authority be resolved by the courts,” CRS said in a Wednesday report. “There are also questions on whether the FCC may alter its rulemaking efforts in response to Loper Bright, as well as how such alterations might affect interest in legislation.” The FCC’s July FCC order that lets schools and libraries obtain E-rate support for off-premises Wi-Fi hot spots and wireless internet services (see 2407180024), April net neutrality rules and a 2023 digital discrimination order “illustrate the types of rules that might be challenged as exceeding FCC authority under Loper Bright or the major questions doctrine,” researchers said. Maurine and Matthew Molak petitioned the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week to review the E-rate Wi-Fi order (see 2408300027). The Molaks, whose 16-year-old son died by suicide after he was cyberbullied, say that ruling would give children and teenagers unsupervised social media access. Numerous FCC rules even before Loper Bright "were being contested by affected parties, including” the 5G Fund and next-generation 911 transition, “in both of which the FCC cites its public interest mandate,” CRS said. Researchers also noted the FCC’s 2022 notice of inquiry about ways to aid nascent in-space servicing, assembly and manufacturing companies (see 2208050023) “has come under scrutiny from interested parties.”

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged Congress Friday to reach a legislative deal allowing dynamic spectrum sharing on DOD-controlled bands. Pompeo is a Rivada Networks board member (see 2305230040). Frequencies that have military incumbent systems, most notably the 3.1-3.45 GHz band, have been a stumbling block in lawmakers’ attempts to reach a consensus on a broad spectrum legislative package (see 2408150039). Proposals “for Congress to grant sole control over critical bands to private firms, pushing the Pentagon, and their missions, aside … would be a costly mistake that would put American national security at risk,” Pompeo said in a Fox News opinion piece. “Massive amounts of military equipment, from radar to weapons systems, have already been developed and optimized specifically for the spectrum bands in question, and changing that … would take decades to complete and cost hundreds of billions of dollars.” That “unnecessarily grants our adversaries a victory and makes us less safe.” It also “discourages competition and opens the door to companies like Huawei and ZTE, the Chinese Communist Party’s state-backed spyware peddlers, to gain an even bigger share of global wireless hardware manufacturing.” Congress “needs to step up and find a solution that meets the needs of both consumers and our military, and spectrum sharing could be just such a solution.” Pompeo cited the FCC’s three-tiered model for sharing spectrum on the 3.5 GHz citizens broadband radio service band and the more recent CBRS 2.0 framework (see 2406120027) as successful models. “Shared licensing democratizes spectrum access, making it accessible to a broad array of users,” which “is critical to unlocking America’s economic potential,” Pompeo said. “The Biden administration could have moved forward with this shared framework last year, but they missed their opportunity. Predictably, it has shown no desire to tackle this problem, as its National Spectrum Strategy simply calls for more studies. This is not leadership.”