I’ve looked everywhere-the dictionary … the thesaurus … Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations … Harry Newton’s telecom opus. And I just can’t find it. I can’t find anything that lists “auctions” as a synonym for “spectrum policy.”
But it must exist somewhere, because the FCC spent an entire day last week using the two terms interchangeably. What had been advertised as an en banc hearing on spectrum policy somehow turned into an auction lovefest. Instead of being called on to answer questions released by the commission Feb. 14-which dealt with such sensitive topics as “How can future demand be forecast?” “How will new technologies affect the supply and demand for spectrum in the future?” and “How should public-interest obligations be determined?”-panelists were queried most of the time on where the channels are, who is on them, and can they be sold with minimum pain. Silly me. I thought we’d be hearing about spectrum management into the year 2000.
While a few private radio concerns were represented on the four panels, most participants were chosen from companies or concerns that would benefit from continued auctions.
Oh, yes, there was some concern expressed as to public interest, the future of public-safety spectrum, and how such essential services will grow during the next several years, but the solutions were not what that industry niche wanted to hear. Cops may have to rely more and more on commercial services. They may have to share spectrum in some jurisdictions. And they might just have to buy some, although Phil Verveer-representing the commission’s Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee-said government agencies could never amass the funds to play auction roulette.
Chairman Reed Hundt then threw out this concept: Public safety uses a lot of gas to perform its functions, and the government doesn’t provide that for free, so why should additional spectrum be provided gratis? “Why should we grant spectrum as a quasi-property right?” he asked. According to Verveer, if public-safety entities were fully funded, maybe they could compete in an auction environment, to which Hundt replied, “Maybe some auction revenues could be diverted to public safety.”
(But if the FCC can’t convince Congress to allow it self-funding via auction revenues, how could public safety ever count on getting any?)
Anyway, it looks as though the commission got what it wanted regarding spectrum policy input. If there is a choice between “management” and “auctions,” it looks as if the block always will win. The FCC has made it clear that there no longer are free lunches, even for the “monetarily challenged,” and there are some big players out there who agree.
