|
Wireless spectrum is a finite resource, and the 2.5GHz band is particularly precious in the current market as the mobile industry prepares for next-generation 5G wireless networks. It should thus be very concerning to the public that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Commissioner Brendan Carr are investigating groups for misusing public spectrum licenses that were granted for educational use in the 2.5 GHz band.
In 1963 the FCC reserved a portion of 2.5 GHz wireless spectrum “to spur teaching via TV, dubbing the range of frequencies IFTS (Instructional Television Fixed Service) . . . [and] in 2004, the FCC changed the allowed use of the educational spectrum from TV to internet, and ITFS became the Educational Broadband Service (EBS).” EBS is designed to give spectrum licenses to entities that teach or provide educational materials, but recently, Commissioner Carr has demanded answers from 3 groups that are apparently using their EBS spectrum licenses spectrum for their own, non-educational purposes, including for political activity.
Under a change made in 2003, EBS license-holders can lease their spectrum to other organizations on the secondary market, and nonprofits such as Voqal, a “nonprofit focused on funding educational wireless services” and one of the groups in Carr’s crosshairs, appear to be using revenues from leasing their spectrum to fund political causes and advocacy groups. Carr’s letter asks about donations Voqal made to political and advocacy groups, as it appears to have funded groups that lobbied for net neutrality as well as for social justice causes.
In their 2018 annual report Voqal correctly noted that the EBS band of spectrum “is extremely valuable.” What is this value going towards? One project Voqal spends its EBS-derived funds on is fellowships “empowering everyday citizens to respond to [the] changing political climate.” But the donor report notes that it is grant-making in particular where Voqal is “well-equipped to assist the groups on the front lines” of the fight to protect those most at risk.
One recipient of Voqal’s grants is Mobile Citizen wireless service, whose mission statement is: “Advancing social equity by building an educated, empowered and engaged public.” Mobile Citizen is clearly aware that their political work is the core motivation of the funding it receives from Voqal. As their Chief Business Development Officer wrote in Voqal’s annual report, “while the intricacies of spectrum and the public airwaves may seem academic, social justice is lively work and Voqal strives to respond to opportunities and meet needs, as they arise.” She continued, “during this time of crisis, it became clear there is a need for short-term loans of free devices and internet services for groups rallying against attacks on social equity.”
Mobile Citizen also funds very specific get-out-the-vote efforts noting in a media release about a partnership with North Carolina Fair Share that their “goal is to get more candidates in the pipeline and more people into the online voter database.” The release also notes that “the organization relies heavily on Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology which runs the large mobile phone banks that connects them with the community and requires a significant amount of digital bandwidth.” That bandwidth is supplied through a grant by Voqal.
Voqal is supposed to be a nonprofit educational organization. It’s surprising to see such blatant misuse of a government-granted spectrum given to an education group exercising their granted spectrum rights to pay for explicit politically charged advocacy. This spectrum grant program was designed for educational purpose, not to support social justice causes.
It is questionable whether any of this is legitimate activity for an EBS licensee. The regulation says EBS license recipients must be “an accredited institution or . . . a government organization engaged in the formal education of enrolled students or to a nonprofit organization whose purposes are education and providing educational and instructional television material.” It also notes the licensee should have a connection to the local community and neighborhood schools, with special requirements on licensees that are not themselves schools or are not local.
The FCC is right to review these programs. The 1960’s spectrum grant program had the goal of enhancing educational opportunities. The changes made in the regulatory process in 2003 were meant to allow the program to enable the same overall goal of continued access to educational tools and programs, not to fund political advocacy using a publicly granted asset. This grant originally designed for enhancing education could be used to connect today’s students to the internet, especially in underserved areas where broadband build out can be a financial challenge and local efforts are a major help to educating kids. FCC Commissioner Carr is right to exercise the Commission’s oversight authority by asking Voqal about their use of this valuable government grant. I look forward to reviewing their answers.
Wireless spectrum is a precious resource, and the Federal Communications Commission is right to investigate whether Educational Broadband Service license holders are using their allocated spectrum appropriately.
|
