Working to Ensure Consumer Choice, Competition

This week, the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee held a hearing to consider the implications of the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile.  Clearly, this is an important matter, and has drawn comments from both proponents and opponents.  I appreciate the arguments from those who support or oppose the merger.  But, there is still much to learn.  The testimony from the witnesses will go a long way toward helping us see the impact on the American public. 

One of my particular interests is how the proposed merger will help or hinder rural residents in Iowa.  Will they gain access to faster and more dependable wireless services?  Will it cause increased rates?  Will it spur more consumer choice?  At the hearing, AT&T and T-Mobile were very accommodating to rural America but admitted some problem areas.

For instance, I asked about the AT&T service currently offered in the Sioux City area.  I understand that service is even more limited there than in other areas.  And, T-Mobile doesn’t even offer service in the region, which, to me, means that under the merger, there may be no real benefit to the region's residents.  The AT&T and T-Mobile representatives at the hearing were upfront that the Sioux City area would be a difficult nut to crack regarding more provision of wireless service.  I hope, though, that whether the merger is approved or not, rural residents in Iowa and elsewhere in America will get access to fast, dependable wireless service.

As the merger process moves forward, the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission need to carefully scrutinize the merger to ensure that Americans are not harmed by having fewer provider choices.  Choices in the marketplace generally spur competition, innovation, and lower prices, and it’s imperative that this choice remains in place for the consumer.