WASHINGTON-The wireless telecommunications industry is finding out once again about the wondrous ways and means of lawmakers and lobbyists, and the institution they share-Congress.
Every day is a new day in politics; what was yesterday might not be today.
In 1993, when Democrats ran Congress, the regulatory landscape of the wireless telecommunications industry was transformed virtually overnight after a meeting of the minds of powerful lobbying and legislative forces.
When the dust settled, a new deregulatory regime to level the competitive playing field had been established. The role of state regulators was diminished. Two hundred megahertz of federal government spectrum was transferred to the private sector. And a novel form of licensing, called auctions, arrived to bring the U.S. treasury billions of dollars.
Good timing and having the right vehicle helped. A major deficit-reduction budget bill was on idle, but once loaded, sped down Pennsylvania Avenue to President Clinton’s desk for his signature on Aug. 10, 1993.
Just like that.
In 1995, Congress is in Republican hands and sweeping telecommunications legislation is the ticket.
Cellular and personal communications services carriers want more deregulation. Once more, their intense lobbying has created a critical mass of interest by lawmakers on several key issues. Progress is being made on nearly all fronts.
House and Senate telecommunications reform bills exempt commercial wireless carriers from most common carrier obligations directed at local Bell telephone monopolies.
The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association and the Personal Communications Industry Association, despite being rejected early on for pushing a proposal deemed anti-federalist, rounded up bipartisan support for an amendment to the House Commerce Committee’s telecommunications reform bill on national antenna siting guidelines.
What the two associations did not count on was Joe Barton, a folksy yet tenacious Republican from Texas who sits several seats down from Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, R-Va.
Barton, championing cellular resellers’ demand for interconnected wireless resale, has altered the political dynamics of what has become a fiery debate on Capitol Hill.
Resellers, fewer in number than wireless carriers, found someone capable of equalizing the two trade groups’ potent lobbying firepower. Barton has seniority on the panel, and is one of four Texans (two Republicans, two Democrats) on the Commerce Committee.
The original Barton amendment would have reregulated commercial wireless carriers in the name of promoting more competition in an industry awaiting up to six PCS licensees in every market.
After negotiations among cellular carriers, resellers and lawmakers, the proposal was watered down to require the Federal Communications Commission to determine whether market conditions and consumer interests warrant interconnected resale. To date, the agency has not shown a great desire to mandate resale permanently.
Resellers, though, refused the carriers’ demand that wireless providers in the same market be prohibited from selling out to one another.
Twice-once during subcommittee markup of the Bliley bill and again at the end of full committee consideration of the legislation-House telecommunications subcommittee Chairman Jack Fields, R-Texas, persuaded Barton to withdraw his amendment to give the parties more time to resolve their differences.
Wireless carriers, despite their strength over resellers, feared all along that disciplined GOP voting made Bliley’s and Fields’ actions unpredictable. Those fears were well founded.
In two long days of committee markup, during which more than 30 amendments were offered, only one Republican amendment to the telecommunications legislation was defeated. GOP House members like to stick to together. Voting against Barton would have been a big embarrassment for Republicans.
Getting Barton to pull his amendment the first time worked well for wireless carriers, who were able to buy time to beef up support and work out a compromise with resellers.
The same cannot be said the second time the amendment was tabled. Wireless carriers wanted a vote, believing they had enough support to defeat Barton’s measure. Interestingly, Barton’s amendment was expected to come up at the start of the second day of markup. But because of an oversight, owing to furious back-room negotiations on the wireless resale amendment, it was not called up until close to the end of the markup when lawmakers were anxious to leave town for the week-long Memorial Day recess.
It is left to speculation whether Bliley and Fields would have gone forward with a vote had the Barton amendment been presented earlier in the day. With the resale controversy and the Bliley telecommunications bill headed to the House floor next month, the possibilities are many. Resellers and carriers could reach a deal, though CTIA President Thomas Wheeler said it’s unlikely.
Putting an amendment before House members who have little or no familiarity with the wireless resale issue could work to Barton’s advantage. On the other hand, resellers lack the carriers’ ability to educate 435 House members.
It’s a toss-up.
