Anyone else think spectrum shouldn’t be sold, but instead be rented?
Like make 20 year deals, where they auction a rate for 20 years, then in 20 years, it returns to the government. Then the highest bidder then can get it for another 20 years. I think this is needed for multiple reasons. (The time frame doesn’t have to be 20 years. It can be 10, 15, 20,25, 30, but not forever.)
1) it helps increase competition. And helps new companies come up.
2) It will help meet the needs of the future as they change.
3) It means the current government isn’t selling a very very limited asset that future generations will need, just so it looks like they are taking in a “little” less debt. Financing is currently cheap. Government can sell a 30 year bond at 3% interest, this asset will be worth more than that in 30 years. Selling assets to avoid debt is like my parents selling their house so I’m not left with a mortgage payment.
Don’t even get me started on all the spectrum that was given away for free in the 90’s. Though I’d never vote for John McCain, I applaud him for being one of the lone voices in the Senate to vote against the bill that gave billion of dollars worth of spectrum away for free to incumbent broadcasters. (only 5 senators voted against the bill… It’s the 1996 telecommunications act if you want to look it up.)