Constitution Day 2025

 by Randolph May

 

Tomorrow, September 17, is Constitution Day, the day on which we celebrate the 238^th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution of 1787 by thirty-nine Framers in Philadelphia. The signing marked the end of a long hot summer of debate – debate sometimes seemingly as heated as the temperature in the modest Assembly Room of the Pennsylvania State House, the name of which was later changed to Independence Hall.

After the Constitutional Delegates adjourned for a final time, Elizabeth Willing Powell questioned Ben Franklin: "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" Franklin's response: "A republic, if you can keep it."

Perhaps this is an apocryphal tale. But nevertheless, one that should be a constant reminder to all Americans of good will that the democratic Republic which our Constitution established is not preordained to last forever. It always has been and forever will be dependent upon "We the People" – the Constitution's first three words – to nourish and sustain the American Experiment in democracy.

Now, in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination, the fabric of our Republic seems especially frayed. Of course, the societal instability – even breakability – we feel because of increasing acts of violence rooted in political differences did not arise overnight. Far from it. And it has many causes.

But it's blinking reality not to acknowledge that over-the-top overheated political rhetoric – while never ever a justification for acts of violence like the one that killed Charlie Kirk – is likely one of those causes.

I do not intend to point fingers from or at the left or right. That's not what's needed in America now.

Here, on this Constitution Day, one should turn back to the Constitution – and the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. The guarantee that citizens must enjoy the freedom to speak freely is essential to the continuation of the American Experiment.

But with that freedom, secured by the Constitution if we can keep it, also comes the responsibility of us all to encourage civil discourse and respectful debate about controversial issues, while at the same time adhering to fundamental principles in which we believe.

Voltaire declared: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

At the Free State Foundation, we have tried to model that behavior since our founding in 2006. And I pledge we will continue to do so.

With friendship and optimism on Constitution Day,  

 

Congressman Latta's Bill Would Cut Wireless Permitting Red Tape

On September 4, Representative Bob Latta (R-OH), co-chair of the Rural Broadband Caucus, reintroduced the Winning the International Race for Economic Leadership and Expanding Service to Support (WIRELESS) Leadership Act (the Act). First introduced in February 2021, the Act would "modernize broadband permitting to reduce barriers to deployment."

Among other things, the Act would:

• Establish shot clocks for state and local agencies to act on an application (60 days for the placement of a "small" personal wireless facility using an existing structure, 90 days for other actions relating to a "small" facility or to a larger facility using an existing structure, and 150 days for other actions relating to a larger facility), after which, and upon written notice to the agency, the application would be deemed granted.

• Prohibit "discriminat[ion] among personal wireless service facilities or providers of communications service."

• Ban state and local agencies from exercising their local zoning authority in a manner that would "prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision, improvement, or enhancement of personal wireless services.

• Require that fees be "competitively neutral, technology neutral, and nondiscriminatory"; "established in advance and publicly disclosed"; "calculated based on actual and direct costs" that are "objectively reasonable."

Parties that have been "adversely affected by any final action or failure to act" could seek either expedited judicial relief or administrative relief from the FCC, which would be required to act upon such a request within 120 days.

As Congressman Latta was quoted in the Press Release, "Over the years, billions of dollars have been allocated to expand rural broadband, but without meaningful broadband permitting reform, … all of the federal money will be tied up in burdensome permitting reviews…. " The Act would "streamline state and local permitting, cut through burdensome reviews, and accelerate broadband deployment so more communities can get connected."

The President's Ultimate Authority to Manage Government Spectrum Shouldn't Be Restricted

 

Senator Deb Fischer is proposing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) currently being debated on the Senate floor that would prohibit modification of the spectrum between 3.1 - 3.4 GHz and between 7.4 - 8.4 GHz unless the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff jointly agree. In spectrum provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill reconciliation statute, these bands generally were exempted from being designated for auction to private sector entities. But the Defense Department was not granted authority to supercede normal executive branch decision-making. Nor could it be. 

Here's a tweet from August 14 with my response to Senator Fischer's proposal: 

 

I agree w/ @SenatorFischer it's imp't for DoD to have sufficient #spectrum to carry out its mission. But this does't mean DoD's spectrum needs shouldn't be questioned or balanced against other nat'l interests. And DoD can't be left to decide for itself its own #spectrum needs.

Free State Foundation (@FSFthinktank) x.com

Now that the NDAA bill is being debated, the White House has issued a formal objection to Senator Fisher's proposed amendment, stating: "The certification would hinder the President’s executive authority."

                                               

                                                

I agree. This is not a matter of supporting the military and its mission, which I do. But, ultimately, under our Constitution, the president is Chief Executive as well as Commander in Chief, responsible for overseeing the entire executive branch, and, of course the military. Congress cannot properly restrict a president's executive authority by handing over final decision-making authority to his subordinates.

Presumably President Trump - and any future president - will want to ensure, just as much as Senator Fischer, that our nation's military has the spectrum it needs to protect defend us.

Senator Fischer should withdraw her amendment.   

Wireless Use Continues Rapid Gains

According to  new CTIA report, for the third straight year, the demand for wireless data grew by roughly 35%. Here are some other eye-popping data points regarding the use of mobile data as documented in the new CTIA survey:

• Americans used 132 trillion megabytes of mobile data in 2024, up from 100 trillion in 2023. 

• Carriers invested an estimated $29 billion in their networks in 2024, down from $30 billion last year and a record $39 billion in 2022.

                                                                 

• The U.S. wireless industry activated 15,000 cell towers in 2024, and the number of small cells in use is up 110% since 2018.

• There are a total of 579 million U.S. wireless connections, or 1.7 connections for every person.

• Approximately 259 million connections were 5G, an increase of 43 million over the previous year. 

•  By the end of 2024, there were 12 million fixed-wireless subscribers which is projected to increase 1.7 times by 2028.

These figures leave little doubt regarding the importance of making available more licensed spectrum in a timely manner to accommodate  the continued significant growth in usage. And along with making available substantial licensed spectrum, the need for ensuring adequate spectrum is available for WiFi cannot be ignored.

Colorado's Plan Provides Useful BEAD Insights

 In today's Policyband, Ted Hearn provides some figures regarding Colorado's revised BEAD proposal that are useful in suggesting key policy insights.

This from Policyband: 

"Amazon’s Project Kuiper and SpaceX’s Starlink were tentatively awarded about half of the roughly 90,000 homes and buildings with either no service or speeds below 100/20 megabits per second. Fiber providers captured 48% of the locations, while fixed wireless accounted for 2%. Colorado awarded $25.3 million to Project Kuiper to serve 42,252 locations – about 47% of all locations – at about $600 per location, while Starlink received $9.1 million to serve 5,400 locations – about 6% of all locations – at about $1,700 per location."

 

And then here's the kicker:

 

"Because fiber deployment come with high per-locations costs, Colorado awarded 91% of its BEAD funds to fiber Internet Service Providers (ISPs)."

                                                     

The cost difference between providing broadband service via satellite and fiber is significant. Under the Biden administration BEAD plan, Colorado was to receive about $826 million in federal funds, whereas under the reworked Trump administration guidelines, Colorado said it would connect all eligible locations for a cost of $409 million. The $417 million in savings to the governments is not peanuts.

 

So, the Trump administration's abandonment of Biden's "fiber at all costs" policy makes sense, including for America's taxpayers. And it's consistent with Congress's intent in the Infrastructure Act that the BEAD program be technology-neutral.

 

Of course, it matters whether the satellite providers can actually deliver broadband service at the specified 100/20 megabits per second requirement and whether Amazon's Project Kuiper can actually get its satellites up and running in time to meet its commitments in this regard. Apparently, Colorado thinks both contingencies can be met or it would have proposed a different plan.

 

And I have a lot of confidence that new NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth, who has been on top of observing implementation of the BEAD program for years as the key telecom aide to Senator Ted Cruz, will ensure that NTIA administers the program efficiently and effectively. 

 

BTW, if you are not subscribing to Policyband, you should. Always useful information intelligently presented – and often with a bit of wit.