Newsflash: the outgoing President is concerned with the outgoing FCC chief's plan for a nationwide, free wireless broadband network that was probably never going to get built anyway. As we've noted, the FCC is set to vote on December 18 on a plan that would involve auctioning off spectrum in the AWS-3 (2155-2180 MHz) band, with the condition that whoever buys it must deploy at least 768kbps, smut-filtered wireless to 95% of the country in ten years time. That alone is a pretty tall order, especially with a struggling economy.

But the plan, which is really just a reconstituted version of a proposal by a company named M2Z Networks, is also being opposed by most incumbent operators, who want to bid on that spectrum without attached conditions. With the lobbying support of other carriers, T-Mobile has taken the lead in this fight, insisting that the plan would cause interference. That's despite FCC tests that prove otherwise, and the fact that T-Mobile successfully uses Time Division Duplex technology overseas with absolutely no interference problems.

AT&T and Verizon have also actively lobbied against the plan; not because they want the spectrum, but out of desire to avoid an additional competitive player from entering the market. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, former CEO of Kellogg and the President's principal adviser on telecommunications and information policy issues, sent a December 10 letter to FCC boss Kevin Martin that not coincidentally parrots the objections of wireless carriers:By "market forces," Gutierrez means the whims of incumbent operators, who traditionally dominate such auctions because of their size. M2Z Networks quickly responded, noting that opposing the plan somewhat contradicted Bush's 2004 promise to bring broadband to "every corner of our country by the year 2007." Stepping around the fact that the goal was, well, a failed one, the Administration insists that requiring a carrier to deliver wireless broadband to everyone, for free, "would likely lead to congested and inefficiently used broadband."

If it gets past incumbent lobbyists, the Whitehouse and the FCC vote (which it probably won't), the plan is also seeing some resistance from free speech activists and consumer advocates, who insist government-mandated Internet filters are unconstitutional. Earlier this year, 22 different public interest groups filed their opposition (pdf) to M2Z's planned use of filters, saying that even if they were opt-in, they would violate the First Amendment.