WANTED: A BOLD U.S. SPECTRUM POLICY 

By Michael O’Rielly 

Americans are infatuated with their wireless devices and the accompanying services.  Consider that industry stats show consumers possess over 524 million wireless devices in a 275 million population above 15 years old and 97% of Americans own a cellphone.  For many consumers, staying connected from dawn to dusk enhances productivity, communications, entertainment, and more.  But what if government inaction generates the U.S. industry’s contraction, or worse, collapse?  That’s exactly the situation today as U.S. policymakers are seemingly stuck on how best to find more wireless spectrum for commercial purposes, a necessary ingredient for successful wireless recipes.  And the rest of the world will happily take the profits from wireless’ popularity while eagerly preparing to scoop the U.S. in the next wireless revolution.  Responsively, U.S. policymakers should kill its stagnation by pursuing an exceptionally bold spectrum policy that bets on American wireless ingenuity to lead the global marketplace.    

 

There is wide bipartisan recognition from Congress and the Biden Administration that America must identify and reallocate more spectrum for commercial services, be it licensed, unlicensed, or shared, to meet growing consumer demand or endure major consequences.  The undeniable truth is that the current bucket is almost bare.  Study after study shows that we lack the requisite spectrum inventory to enable and fulfill future wireless technologies across the board.  Without strong action on spectrum, congestion on existing allocations will slow consumer connections, strain wireless networks, and shutter device development.  For consumers, their smartphones and tablets will be like trying to operate most ten-year-old laptops: sluggish and frustrating.  On a larger scale, this dearth will punish the functionality and competitiveness of American businesses, thereby serving as a massive drain on U.S. GDP.  Few people give sufficient recognition to the role played by the wireless industry in our economy.         

 

Sadly, the global story is equally disturbing.  With China leading the charge, Japan, France, South Korea, Britain and others are pushing aggressively to allocate more commercial spectrum domestically wireless services.  These countries want to seize on any U.S. passivity in order to steal the lead on 5G and corner the nascent 6G market.  They also see this as way to ensure their consumers have the best and most capable wireless technologies.     

 

Similarly, people should know that China is trying to find friendly nations as the world prepares for the next iteration of the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC), a quadrennial international spectrum coordination effort to be held in just weeks from now.  The country’s goal is fairly straight-forward: demand new spectrum allocations that prop-up Chinese wireless companies while undercutting the U.S. wireless leadership across licensed and unlicensed spectrum bands. 

 

So, what does going bold mean?  For starters, the Administration must conclude its “spectrum strategy” after two-plus years in the making.  Better yet, it should up the ante to identify 2500 or 3000 MHz of new commercial spectrum and make sure each band is available in the nearer term rather than just vaguely plausible someday for reallocation.  Additionally, the Administration needs to stop coddling Federal agency spectrum users.  Their arguments have proven empty and driven by a fear of missing out, not mission critical threats.  These chicken-little prognosticators scream over spectrum changes to distant bands and phantom interference, and their opposition must not be the basis for resolving disputes with the private sector.  Further, bold means taking WRC-23 more seriously, especially heightening the level of diplomatic participation.  Fumbling the U.S. appointment of a new delegation head has been a problem of our own making.  To rectify, why isn’t Vice President Harris, Secretary Blinken, or Secretary Raimondo showing up in Dubai to secure American wins?   

 

Being audacious on wireless issues can and should be done without undermining recent licensed, unlicensed, and shared spectrum success stories.  Instead, this should be an opportunity -- a call to arms, if you will -- to sidestep our micro-squabbles and attack the commercial shortage problem head-on.  Our purpose should be to push current Federal users out of underused bands and shrink their footprints in line with modern technology.   

 

True and persuasive leadership is actually very hard.  Quite frankly, it’s easier to be called a leader or be elected to a position of leadership than to actually lead.  On spectrum policy, we need real and immediate leadership from the White House and Congress that releases new commercial bands for all types of services.  Doing so will set the U.S. in a position of strength and stymie other countries attempts to break through in the global wireless race.