American Broadband Deployment Act's Local Opponents Campaign for Defeat in House

Officials affiliated with NATOA and other local government groups called on their supporters during a Monday webinar to lobby or otherwise communicate with House members in a bid to oppose the Commerce Committee-cleared American Broadband Deployment Act (HR-3557) ahead of what they view as chamber leaders’ impending bid to ram through passage of the measure without adequately consulting them. The measure, which House Commerce advanced in May without any Democratic support (see 2305240069), packages multiple GOP-led connectivity permitting revamp measures.

Angelina Panettieri, National League of Cities legislative director-information technology and communications, and other officials noted their displeasure at House Commerce members for not seeking local government groups’ input as they put the bill together. An April House Communications Subcommittee hearing that focused on permitting proposals that made it into HR-3557 had “no local government representation” (see 2304190068) and groups began amplifying their opposition to the measure during the summer, Panettieri said. “We thought we were going to have an opportunity to speak to our concerns” about HR-3557 via the Natural Resources and Transportation committees, but both panels discharged their jurisdiction over the measure, said Best Best localities lawyer Gerry Lederer. House Commerce didn’t immediately comment.

HR-3557 would affect “every one of you” in some way, including erosion of local authority over wireless, wireline and cable permitting, said Bradley Werner's Nancy Werner, former NATOA general counsel. “You’re going to be stuck with the implications of this bill if it passes.” She in part cited provisions that would allow “appeals of local decisions” to the FCC, which is “a different ballgame” compared with adjudicating in local courts. It “really changes the dynamics of how disputes over local permitting issues might go,” Werner said. “We don’t want to cure this bill” because it “can’t be cured,” Lederer said.

Lederer and others voiced worries about how far HR-3557 has already come in the legislative process compared with recent Congresses, in which lawmakers proposed some of the legislative language in the current bill but never managed to get it through either the House or Senate Commerce committees. House Commerce transmitted its report on HR-3557 to the full chamber in early October after Natural Resources and Transportation discharged their jurisdiction, which is the “last step” that needed to happen before floor consideration, Panettieri said.

It’s clear that HR-3557 “is being steamrolled through” the House despite unified opposition from House Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone of New Jersey and other panel Democrats, Panettieri said. House Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., said during an October USTelecom event (see 2310200067) she saw movement on the measure as a major priority once the chamber selected a new speaker to replace ousted leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. Mike Johnson, R-La., took over as speaker in late October. Panettieri said she’s concerned some moderate House Democrats who aren’t on Commerce or are otherwise not experienced with telecom policy may view supporting HR-3557 as a way to appear bipartisan and to be “expediting broadband without spending any money.”

“We have multiple opportunities to help impact this legislation” ahead of House consideration, with an eye to at least hurt its potential to be attached to an omnibus FY 2024 appropriations package or other must-pass measures, Lederer said. He acknowledged there’s not a clear timeline for the House to take up HR-3557, as the chamber is expected to concentrate this week on moving the FY24 funding measure covering the FCC and FTC (HR-4664), among other measures, and will likely devote next week to moving a continuing resolution to extend federal appropriations past Nov. 17, when an existing CR expires. “We’ve got a week to make our voices heard” at least, Lederer said.

“I don’t worry about it getting out of the Senate,” where Democrats hold the majority, or through the White House with President Joe Biden’s signature, Lederer said. “I do worry about it being added to must-pass legislation.” He provided lists of House Republicans who could be potential opponents of HR-3557, including the 18 representing districts that Biden won in the 2020 presidential election and those who previously served as mayors or in other local government roles. Those lawmakers could register opposition to HR-3557 either by voting against the rule outlining debate on the measure or no on final passage, Lederer said: He also urged the bill’s opponents to contact members of Senate Commerce to seek their “assistance to make sure” it doesn’t move through the upper chamber.