Electric vehicle makers are threatening public safety 

By  

Michael O'Rielly 

 

April 18, 2023 06:00 AM 

Electric vehicles are more popular than ever before among consumers. Today, there are an estimated 2.5 million EVs on American roads, and the excitement of EVs’ potential has infected certain policymakers, who want to decree that EVs be the only permissible vehicles within their borders. 

But the EV growth picture is not all rosy: Some automobile manufacturers of these vehicles are turning back the dial in a way that could affect public safety. A select group of EV producers is eliminating AM radio from new vehicles. While there may very well be unspoken competitive reasons or financial deals in the mix, the company line given is that AM radio is incompatible with an electromagnetic interference generated from electric engines, creating an audible buzzing sound. Instead of trying to fix the issue, which several automakers have accomplished at an infinitesimal cost, at least eight manufacturers have decided to purge AM radio from the consoles of their EV models altogether. 

AM radio has a long and distinguished place in communications history. For almost 130 years, it has informed and entertained listeners during some of the most crucial and important moments in time. Despite other technological advances, AM radio still feeds a vital population with insightful programming. Given its propagation characteristics, it can often travel great distances at low cost, reaching more sparsely populated areas of our nation. Like radio generally, AM radio can be most popular for listeners on the go during travel, commutes, and work when there are no other viable options. And AM stations often serve as a point of entry for new owners and managers, especially minorities. 

Dumping AM radio devices from EVs eliminates an important form of communication that the public can use during times of emergency. The federal emergency alert system, for example, relies on AM radio to communicate with the public, and the Federal Communications Commission, my former agency, has gone to great lengths over multiple years to strengthen and fortify this system. Just last year, it finalized a yearlong rulemaking process to expand access and add clarity to emergency messages. When a blizzard, hurricane, or other event knocks out the internet and television signals, the public can still rely on the emergency alert system to stay informed — in large part due to how resilient its AM signals are. 

Many know this from their own experiences. When Hurricane Sandy demolished the Northeast in 2012, thousands frantically tuned into AM radio. The New York Times reported that more than 1 million people were listening to the radio during any 15-minute interval during that crisis. Similarly, the Washington Post detailed how locals in New Orleans found a “source of hope” in local radio stations when Hurricane Ida took their state by storm in 2021. 

On this point, seven former FEMA officials signed a letter decrying many EV makers’ decision to remove AM radio from their vehicles. The letter warns that if more EV producers scrap AM radio, “it will represent a grave threat to future local, state, and federal disaster response and relief efforts.” In a statement, Antwane Johnson, director of FEMA’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System, agreed with the letter’s sentiment, adding, “AM radio has been tested over and over during the most devastating natural disasters — and has withstood them all.” 

Likewise, FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington pleaded with EV makers to stop interfering with the emergency alert system. In a recent press release , the commissioner “[applauded] the statement by FEMA leaders on the importance of AM radio for disaster response” and “underscore[d] and affirm[ed] their concerns in the strongest possible terms.” He also emphasized how much rural communities “depend upon AM radio for information about emergencies, particularly alerts about weather,” and stressed the importance of not leaving these people behind. 

To be clear, I reject the notion of government mandates as a way to force AM radio installation in EVs. Indeed, 10 EV automakers, including Nissan, Honda, and Toyota, have voluntarily retained AM radio after successfully suppressing any problematic noise from their electric vehicles when paired with AM radio devices. A cheap and easy fix, less than $100 in a $50,000 to $100,000 vehicle, is equally obtainable for Ford, Tesla, and the rest; they just need to commit to making it. 

Unfortunately, the public continues to hear static emanating from these corporate auto executives, who would prefer to abandon AM than address the problem. If these people genuinely care about public safety as purported, they will make the necessary adjustments to protect the citizenry before real harm occurs. 

Michael O’Rielly served as a commissioner for the Federal Communications Commission under President Donald Trump. 

 

Reconnecting the Rural eConnectivity Program to Reality

By Michael O'Rielly

 published March 16, 2023

Upcoming Farm Bill should include reforms to make sure rural broadband funding goes where needed

• (opens in new tab)
 
• (opens in new tab)
 

(Image credit: Getty Images)

These days, technology-advanced farms are just as reliant on broadband connectivity as any other modern business. Sensors, automation, autonomous vehicles and other “precision agriculture” tools bring greater efficiencies and productivity to many American farmers, who literally help feed the entire world. The Farm Bureau projects that more widespread adoption of these broadband-enabled best practices could boost U.S. agricultural productivity by $65 billion per year. 

That’s a big reason why Congress is investing in a multitude of federal programs to ensure internet access is available to all corners of our nation, especially households, businesses and farms in rural communities.

Former FCC member Michael O'Rielly (Image credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

One of those initiatives — the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural eConnectivity Program, or ReConnect — is due for some key improvements as Congress considers the upcoming Farm Bill. The adoption of targeted reforms Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) have proposed in the Rural Internet Improvement Act of 2023 would be a smart and thoughtful place to start. 

The ReConnect program has been a bit of an anomaly since its 2018 inception. Initially funded as a one-time pilot project, the program has been extended annually without traditional guardrails or oversight. That has generated some inconsistencies, coordination difficulties and troubling outcomes. For instance, the program’s grant approval process, which fluctuates year to year, functions completely outside the Administrative Procedure Act, preventing interested parties from even commenting on the decision making. And those decisions deserve review. 

Improving ReConnect, however, must begin with making sure its funding reaches the rural communities that truly need it.  Just about everyone agrees that scarce federal funds must go to ensuring everyone has internet coverage, rather than subsidizing “overbuilds” in areas where fast connectivity already exists.  Every dollar spent overbuilding current networks fails to help needier rural communities gain modern digital infrastructure. 

Yet the overbuilding threshold for ReConnect has at times been lowered from 90% of households without internet in the area (arguably still objectionable) to 50% of households without Internet, which means half of the project would overbuild existing broadband. Why? No sound reasons were provided when it was last modified as part of the infrastructure spending bill. Thankfully, the Rural Internet Improvement Act restores the 90% target and focuses on building networks capable of commonly accepted broadband speeds. If this simple but fundamental correction can’t be made, efforts to codify a flawed ReConnect should be considered a non-starter. 

Likewise, the bill precludes funding for areas already covered by other federal broadband efforts and boosts the provider challenge process. For years, policymakers have demanded coordination from the differing federal broadband programs.  Why in the world should USDA fund broadband buildouts in areas that have already secured Federal Communications Commission, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Treasury Department or other federal funds for the same purpose?  Even the most ardent supporter of ReConnect should blush at the notion of double-dipping. 

Equal Opportunities

Additionally, the Rural Internet Improvement Act moves the program onto more solid ground so all qualified participants can apply and have an equal chance to win grants based on objective criteria. So far, whole broadband industry segments that have met of all the program’s qualifications haven’t won a single dime. The probability of this happening is about the same statistically as a cat successfully driving a tractor. 

A fair ReConnect process does not undercut the likelihood of telephone and electric co-ops, which have been primary beneficiaries of the current structure, from winning where they are the most qualified and prepared to bring service. Policymakers certainly don’t need to tilt the process in co-ops’ favor from the outset. In fact, my long history with telephone co-ops suggests that they are exceptionally capable and attune to rural community needs to do quite well in an impartial application process. This is likely why NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association, an advocate for telephone cooperatives, has been favorable towards the bill, as have others. 

In a perfect world, there shouldn’t be a need to maintain a separate broadband grant program within the Department of Agriculture. For various reasons, policymakers have determined that ReConnect should remain, and I won’t quibble with that decision here. 

But if ReConnect is to continue, then we should expect that it be run fairly and efficiently, target those rural citizens in need, not overbuild areas where existing private sector providers offer service of sufficient quality, and prevent duplicative subsidies for broadband builds already being funded by other federal agencies. Solidifying and codifying these principles is exactly why the Rural Internet Improvement Act would bring credibility and sustainability to any broadband provisions continued in the eventual 2023 Farm Bill. ■

Michael O’Rielly served on the Federal Communications Commission from 2015 to 2020. Prior to joining the agency, he served as a policy adviser in the Office of the Senate Republican Whip, led by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).