{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibiz2bc2yp35dp6sekw2tzumq5jjogahwcjqlm5i6pqshircww2zy",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:mg5ozsljpp6t5b4lvwys4t72/app.bsky.feed.post/3m2uhev7lpy62"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreigfku43tdpdtafspiwhajbp2xnjuhe3vzu35zosxd4r2g5ppl3bpq"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/jpeg",
    "size": 48239
  },
  "description": "The head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the White House oppose the provision.",
  "path": "/senate-passes-defense-bill-without-changes-to-spectrum-language/",
  "publishedAt": "2025-10-10T19:57:49.000Z",
  "site": "https://broadbandbreakfast.com",
  "tags": [
    "_a September speech_",
    "_policy statement_",
    "_Punchbowl News_"
  ],
  "textContent": "WASHINGTON, Oct. 10, 2025 – The Senate passed Thursday an annual defense policy bill without changes to a key spectrum provision.\n\nThe language, included in the Senate-passed bill, would allow top military officials to veto modifications to the lower 3 GigaHertz (GHz) and much of the 7/8 GHz bands. Those airwaves, currently used by the military, are already protected from being auctioned under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but Senate Commerce Committee Chairman **Ted Cruz** , R-Texas, had still hoped to axe the veto provision.\n\nHe said the National Telecommunications and Information Administration would likely have to move other federal operators into the bands at issue to meet the OBBBA’s goal of auctioning 500 megahertz of government spectrum, something Cruz pushed hard to secure. He worried vetoes from the Pentagon, which is not eager to disrupt critical systems, could complicate efforts to free up spectrum.\n\n“Practically speaking, this means NTIA would not even be able to move other federal operators to these bands – which it will have to do to clear the spectrum pipeline – unless first receiving approval from the sovereigns at the Joint Chiefs,” Cruz said in _a September speech_.\n\nIt’s not clear the language will make it into the final legislation, which the House and Senate will have to agree on. The House-passed version doesn’t include the provision, and the White House has said it opposes it.\n\nRequiring the defense secretary and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to clear modifications to the bands “would hinder the President’s executive authority,” the White House said in a September _policy statement_.\n\nHouse Commerce Committee Chairman **Richard Hudson** , R-N.C., also said he opposes the language.\n\n“I don’t think we need to give any kind of veto authority to the Pentagon,” he said at a _Punchbowl News_ event Thursday. “I think that could be counterproductive.”\n\nHe added, “It’s the same administration, the Pentagon and the FCC, so I do think they’ll take their needs into account. I don’t think we need that language.”\n\nThe Senate also did not vote on proposed amendments from Sen. **Maria Cantwell** , D-Wash., the top Democrat on Cruz’s committee, that would have protected more bands from potential Federal Communications Commission auction.\n\nThose include shared CBRS spectrum and the unlicensed 6 GHz band. The House draft of the OBBBA had protected them from auction, but the language was stripped from the text that became law.",
  "title": "Senate Passes Defense Bill Without Changes to Spectrum Language",
  "updatedAt": "2026-03-11T05:44:49.528Z"
}