Wireless industry warns H.121 is a price mandate that could reduce affordable fixed‑wireless options and face federal preemption

Jeremy Crandall (identified in the record also as Jeremy Trandell), assistant vice president for state legislative affairs at CTIA, testified Feb. 14 in opposition to House Bill 121, which aims to create an affordability pathway for broadband service in Vermont. “This is an artificial price mandate on private companies,” he told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee.

Crandall said the bill risks unintended consequences that could harm the affordability the Legislature seeks to promote. He pointed to New York’s recent affordability law as an example, saying one major carrier publicly cited that law when it announced it would cease a fixed‑wireless offering in that state. “I don’t think there’s a better example of what is an artificial price mandate,” Crandall said, warning that H.121 could lead providers to reduce or withdraw certain low‑cost fixed‑wireless services used by new broadband subscribers.

He also raised a potential legal issue: Crandall said federal law — specifically the Federal Communications Act — restricts states from regulating prices for mobile services, and he suggested parts of H.121 might conflict with that federal authority if the bill is interpreted to apply to mobile broadband.

In testimony Crandall offered data his organization compiled to support its argument. He told the committee that, nationally, wireless costs have fallen while demand and investment have risen: he cited a national decline in wireless prices and said the industry invested about $30 billion in 2023. He also told legislators that in Vermont, electricity rates rose roughly 20 percent over the last decade while wireless prices in the same period were down by roughly 44 percent (his testimony referenced that Vermont data specifically), and he said 90 percent of new broadband subscribers nationally are choosing fixed wireless as their option.

Committee members questioned those claims and explored alternative affordability approaches. Representatives discussed federal programs such as the Affordable Connectivity Program and state subsidy models such as LIHEAP or a universal service‑style fund; Crandall said CTIA supported federal affordability programs and agreed to follow up with members about provider participation in subsidy programs and the source data behind some of the figures he cited.

Why it matters: H.121 is designed to expand affordable broadband for low‑income Vermonters, but industry witnesses cautioned that a legislated price requirement could reduce the private‑sector supply of low‑cost fixed‑wireless plans and might be subject to federal preemption if it regulates mobile broadband pricing.

The committee did not vote on H.121 at the hearing; members requested written citations and additional state‑specific data from CTIA, and said they would continue evaluating subsidy and market‑oriented options.