Yesterday I explained that in my view first responders don’t need more spectrum to address their interoperability problem, but instead a different approach to using the spectrum they already have. So if Congress shouldn’t allocate more spectrum for public safety, what should it do to address the problem?
Cyren Call is absolutely right about a lot of things: That we should opt for national networks, rather than 50,000 individual and incompatible radio systems for each locality or agency. That everyone benefits when public safety spectrum is shared with commercial users (as long as first responders have priority). That given the opportunity, the private sector will build public safety networks that first responders can subscribe to. Where Cyren Call goes wrong is in insisting that we need new spectrum to achieve this.
What Congress can do is very simple. Open up spectrum already allocated for public safety and allow private companies to build networks on that spectrum. Allow the FCC to assign spectrum allocated for public safety to commercial carriers (like Verizon or Cyren Call or whoever) directly. Require in the licenses1 that the carrier build a network up to public safety specs. Allow the carriers to sell excess capacity to commercial users, but ensure that first responders have priority. Voila, commercial provision of public safety communications. Don’t want to stop there? There’s more Congress can do.
As you may have noticed, I’ve been saying carriers in plural. Why have only one monopoly public safety network like Cyren Call or the FCC’s present proposal for a national network suggest? Issue public safety licenses to competing carriers and let them vie for public safety customers. This will bring costs down2 and incentivize upgrades and technological innovation. You just have to make sure that you mandate interoperability among licensee.
Another thing, why give away the public safety licenses? Why not auction them off? Obviously they will fetch a lower price than flexible-use spectrum because they will have big strings attached, but that’s to be expected. Not only will this avoid a dog-and-pony show to pick the licensee, but you can give the revenue you generate to first responders to use for equipment and to pay for subscriptions to the networks.
Eventually, if you can stomach it, why not allow public safety to trade (i.e. sell) their existing licenses?3 The carriers could buy them and make better use of the spectrum (much like the wireless carriers aggregated thousands of local licenses into four national networks), and first responders can use the cash to shop for communications service among the competing networks.
- Better yet, instead of including it in a license term that is subject to the slow and manipulatable (is that a word) regulatory process, why not include it in a contract term subject to contract law? (Hat tip McTigue for the idea.) ↑
- Today’s WSJ article about the Senate hearing and the Cyren Call plan notes with amazement that first responder radio equipment is expensive: “In some cases, police agencies are paying $3,500 each for two-way radio devices.” Well, cell phone would cost $3,500, too, if each neighborhood or 100-person company built their own proprietary network. ↑
- Spectrum allocated for public safety cannot be traded. That is, agencies cannot sell their licenses to willing buyers. An entrepreneur looking to build out a national interoperable public safety network, therefore, cannot buy public safety licenses and patch them together. Instead, an entrepreneur would have to purchase spectrum that is allocated for more flexible use and which will likely have more lucrative alternative uses. ↑
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
Comments on this entry are closed.