Last night, Representatives Jay Inslee (WA-01), Fred Upton (MI-06) and Rick Boucher (VA-09) introduced Spectrum Relocation Improvement Act of 2009 (H.R. 3019), which would update the spectrum relocation process. This morning, I issued the following statement in response to the introduction of the House bill:

          "We look forward to working with Congressmen Inslee, Upton and Boucher on this matter.  
          With the lessons learned from the AWS-1 auction, we believe this is a good time to review the
          process to see where improvements can be made."

Earlier this month, CTIA-The Wireless Association® received the "Office of the Secretary of Defense Award for Outstanding Achievement" for working with our members to ensure Service men and women are able to either suspend or terminate their wireless service contracts when deployed without penalties or fees.

On behalf of the wireless industry, we are extremely grateful to the men and women who serve our country. Originally a bill (H.R. 3298) introduced by Representative Patrick Murphy (D-PA), the wireless industry concurred that this was a small token to show our appreciation.

We are proud to be a part of the solution for Service members so they can communicate with their friends and family around the world, regardless of their location. 

Click here to read the PDF version of the letter.

This morning’s LA Times ran a good piece on the wireless “listed property” issue, which is currently being debated in Congress.  The article clearly explains the out-dated, archaic tax code that requires employees to keep track of “personal” calls made on their “work” wireless phones.  This tax-code stems from the early 90’s when wireless was an exclusive, corner-office-executive perk.  The wireless market of 2008 is completely different from the wireless market of the early 90s.  Intense competition has driven down prices, and driven up subscribership over the last 18 years.  Today, wireless is hardly an “executive privilege” – it’s a mainstay of modern American life enjoyed by more than 260 million subscribers.  

Legislation to modernize this tax-code has been has been passed in the House and pending in the Senate.   Let your Senators and Representative know you support this legislation, and let's work together to pass the 2008 MOBILE Cell Phone Act.

U.S. Representative John Culberson (R-TX, 7th District) might be the king of wireless use in Congress. Earlier this week I talked with him about how he's using wireless to communicate with the folks back home in West Houston, why he thinks opening the doors of the hallowed halls in such a way is so important, and a movement by some in the House to put the brakes on what he's doing.

After a fun and interesting Day 1, I thought I might provide some thoughts and reflections on my experience.
 
Some of the most thought-provoking experiences from yesterday included two policy panels that I attended, "Mobile Industry Hot Topics" and "US Wireless and the World."
 
A common theme that I heard explicitly discussed at the Hot Topics panel, and as an under-current in the “US and the World” panel, was that of wireless national framework.
 
CTIA has researched international regulatory systems, and according to our findings, the US's system of both federal and state-by-state wireless regulatory authority is unique. 
 
The possibility of expanded state regulatory authority over wireless is one that simply doesn't make sense. Wireless’ defining characteristic is its mobility -- because of that, wireless is inherently an interstate, not intrastate service. I certainly appreciate the need for state governments to enforce the generally applicable laws and look out for the best interest of their citizens. But, that being said, to allow expanded state-specific regulatory authority over a mobile, interstate service might bring with it unintended consequences.
 
By subjecting wireless carriers to 50 different regulatory systems, we potentially jeopardize the incredible levels of investment and innovation that have characterized our industry.
 
Think about that -- the innovation and investment of the domestic wireless industry is among the most impressive in the world. The regulations of today might not be relevant to the technological realities of tomorrow. To allow short-sighted regulatory preferences to potentially affect this evolving, constantly-changing industry brings with it the possibility of short-changing the American wireless consumer by depriving them new services and technologies.

Click here to listen to our "US Wireless and the World" podcast!

I want to share a letter I sent earlier today to Mrs. Roberta Combs, the president of the Christian Coalition of America. A representative from Mrs. Combs' organization is scheduled to appear Tuesday at the House Judiciary Antitrust Task Force hearing on "'Net Neutrality" and Free Speech.

While the Christian Coalition supports net neutrality/Internet regulation, I think it's critical to consider all of the possible and likely ramifications of government mandates in this area. In that respect, the letter speaks for itself.

I am sincerely hoping that groups such as the Christian Coalition of America recognize the outstanding work the wireless industry is doing to provide parents with useful tools to control  Internet access on their families' wireless devices, as well as the steps carriers take to protect their customers from unwanted and unsolicited material such as pornography and spam, and acknowledge the negative practical implications of ill-advised net neutrality mandates.

 Yesterday I had the opportunity to appear before Chairman Ed Markey's subcommittee to talk about an important issue facing wireless consumers in America. Overall, it was a positive hearing as nearly every committee member and witness communicated a common desire and goal - to continue providing American consumers with the most cutting-edge wireless technology at the most affordable prices possible. The main focus of the hearing was to discuss Chairman Markey's draft wireless legislation and to address the question of how best to treat mobile telecommunications services from a regulatory standpoint. While the draft legislation is still a work in progress, we are very pleased that Chairman Markey has started this important discussion and we look forward to illustrating the many valuable consumer benefits that accompany a uniform set of national standards for wireless service in America. I'd also be remiss if I didn't point out that Energy and Commerce Chairman Dingell and Subcommittee Ranking Member Stearns each expressed support for the idea of having a national set of rules for wireless service.
     

So what exactly are the consumer benefits that have flowed from national uniformity? In my testimony I mentioned that the cost per voice minute, which was about one dollar twenty years ago, has dropped to 4 cents today. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, prices for commercial wireless services have fallen more than 35% since December 1997. During the same period, the average minutes of use ("MOU") per subscriber increased six-fold, from an average of 120 MOU per month to an average of 746 MOU per month. Statistics and realities like the ones I just highlighted put the United States at the forefront of the global, mobile wireless revolution. And it is our hope that with a uniform set of national rules for wireless service, consumers can continue to get the cutting-edge mobile services they want and need at world-leading prices. Stay tuned.