Senate Commerce Committee backs two‑year budget, holds wide‑ranging hearing on spectrum policy and national security

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation approved its committee budget for a two‑year period by unanimous consent and then held a hearing on the role of spectrum policy in the U.S. economy and national security. Chairman Ted Cruz opened the hearing by calling spectrum auctions “one of the most successful drivers of American innovation, economic growth, and global technology leadership.”

The hearing brought together four expert witnesses — an economist, two engineers and a national security specialist — to discuss ways Congress and federal agencies can expand commercial access to mid‑band spectrum while protecting Department of Defense (DOD) capabilities. Witnesses described both technical paths (dynamic spectrum sharing and adaptive radios) and policy paths (restoring FCC auction authority and reforming relocation funding) to accelerate private investment and retain U.S. leadership in wireless technologies.

Why it matters: Committee members framed spectrum as both an economic engine for job creation and a strategic resource for national defense. Several senators warned that delay risks ceding technological leadership to the People’s Republic of China and increasing vulnerability to insecure equipment. At the same time witnesses and senators repeatedly emphasized that any reallocation or auctioning of federal bands must account for physics, legacy military systems and the time and cost needed to upgrade or relocate critical national security sensors.

Most significant testimony and details

- Chairman Ted Cruz argued auctions and a clear mid‑band pipeline are needed to spur private investment and retain U.S. technological leadership. He said it has been “two years since the FCC lost auction authority” and urged action to restore that authority through legislation such as the Spectrum Pipeline Act.

- Ranking Member Maria Cantwell said the committee should expand commercial access while protecting aviation, national‑security and other federal capabilities. Cantwell emphasized interagency planning and testing: “The commercial industry needs access to more spectrum to innovate and bring new technologies to market,” she said, while also stressing that “vital national security, aviation security, and essential federal capabilities that rely on spectrum must be protected.”

- Dr. Thomas Hazlett (Clemson University) framed radio spectrum scarcity as largely policy‑driven and pointed to past reforms such as auctions and overlays that produced rapid private investment. Hazlett testified that “Radio spectrum is a vital component of the modern economy” and argued market‑oriented allocation and clearing targets spur efficient reallocation.

- Dr. Charlie Bayless (Baylor University / SmartHub) described adaptive and reconfigurable hardware and dynamic spectrum management systems being developed at the DOD‑funded SmartHub center. Bayless said those innovations — reconfigurable circuitry, live interference reporting and AI‑assisted spectrum selection — could allow military and commercial systems to coexist more readily.

- Matt Pearl (Center for Strategic and International Studies) stressed auctions’ role in creating the commercial ecosystem that drives broader economic and technological leadership and warned that a Huawei‑led global supply chain would be “catastrophic for national security.” Pearl supported clearing targets but said technical studies and interagency engineering work must precede any auction to avoid degrading critical DOD capabilities.

- Brian Clark (Hudson Institute) emphasized that spectrum competition with China is also a military competition and that some military systems require particular bands for radar, missile defense and sensing. Clark described spectrum uses in the Ukraine war as one example of the operational importance of electromagnetic dominance and said sharing is possible in some bands but “physics matter.”

Points of agreement and contention

Committee members and witnesses generally agreed on three pillars: (1) the U.S. needs more mid‑band spectrum for commercial 5G/6G and associated innovation; (2) DOD and other federal users must preserve essential capabilities; and (3) better interagency engineering coordination and investment in technology can enlarge sharing opportunities. They differed on pace and mechanics: some senators pushed for aggressive clearing targets to raise revenue and accelerate auctions, while others highlighted relocation costs, long upgrade timelines for legacy military systems and the need for classified, technical briefings to resolve system‑level tradeoffs.

Policy and funding details cited at the hearing

- FCC auction authority lapse: witnesses noted the FCC’s auction authority lapsed in March 2023 and described restoring it as a prerequisite for future mid‑band auctions. - Spectrum Pipeline Act: the bill cited by several witnesses and the chairman would establish pipeline targets and restore auction authority (bill details and specific band targets were discussed generally, not finalized in the hearing). - Spectrum Relocation Fund (SRF): senators questioned whether SRF rules (which currently reimburse agencies to restore “comparable capability”) should be reformed to fund modernization that would make sharing feasible. - SmartHub funding: Dr. Bayless said SmartHub operates on a $5 million appropriation and asked for continued congressional support for the center’s research and rapid transfer to industry and DOD contractors. - Examples of sharing models: CBRS (Citizens Broadband Radio Service) and the Ambit process were cited as precedent cases where federal and commercial coexistence was engineered.

Votes at a glance

- Committee budget resolution for the 119th Congress (committee authorization for expenditures covering a two‑year period): Motion made by Ranking Member Maria Cantwell; adopted by unanimous consent. The chairman described the vote as ministerial and the motion was “agreed to.” The committee did not record a roll‑call tally in the hearing record provided.

What the committee requested or directed

Senators asked for follow‑up materials (questions for the record with deadlines listed in the hearing); several members recommended additional classified briefings or technical, interagency working sessions to resolve system‑level impacts on DOD sensors. Multiple senators asked witnesses to submit written recommendations on resolving agency disputes and on WRC‑27 (the next World Radiocommunication Conference) preparation.

Ending

Committee members and witnesses left the hearing aligned on the importance of spectrum to economic and national security goals but divided over the pace and precise mechanics of freeing bands for commercial use. The hearing closed with the chairman setting deadlines for questions for the record; the witnesses were directed to supply written follow‑up responses.