WASHINGTON – U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, today made the following statement at a Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet hearing entitled, “A National Interoperable Broadband Network for Public Safety: Recent Developments”:

“If the FCC had listened to me, Mr. Stearns, and Mr. Upton two-and-a-half years ago, we wouldn’t be in this mess. We, along with 13 of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle, I might point out, wrote the FCC in June 2007 warning that placing public safety conditions on commercial use of the D-block would almost certainly fail from both a public safety and a commercial perspective. Not listening, the FCC went forward anyway and botched the auction. Both the 24 MHz cleared for public safety by the 2005 DTV legislation and the 10 MHz D-block originally intended for commercial use have been sidelined, potential auction proceeds have been lost, and two years have been wasted.

“So here we are again. Some are proposing we simply try the conditioned auction approach again. I strongly urge the FCC not to do it, and if we need to as a subcommittee to inform the FCC not to do that, I support that. I don’t think that will work; it didn’t work the first time and there’s no reason to expect it will work the second time.

“Passing legislation giving the D-block directly to public safety officials for free would provide them more control over the spectrum, and my guess is that some of our witnesses are going to advocate that today but that’s not going to help if we don’t have the money to build it out.

“An unconditioned commercial auction of the D-block could help raise money to build a public safety network on the 24 MHz that the 2005 DTV legislation already cleared for first responders. It’s also a non-regulatory way to promote wireless competition and advance our broadband deployment. But some are skeptical any commercial providers would help construct the network and provide the service under this scenario. There are some that would also argue that from an engineering perspective, the 24 MHz is not enough to create the public safety network. I hope that we have some expert testimony on that issue here today.

“Here’s a crazy idea. Why don’t we start by answering the engineering question first, Mr. Chairman? I’m an engineer. I still have my engineering license. I’m not an electrical engineer, however, so I would be worthless if they delegated that job to me but know how to solve a problem from an engineering perspective. Once we know what’s technologically possible, then we can debate the public policy.

“All too often—whether it’s here or in the network neutrality debate—we send policy wonks and bureaucrats to do an engineer’s work. Let’s get to work, Mr. Chairman.

“I yield back.”