Carr Dodges Amplified House Questions on Broadcast-Ownership Cap Proposals
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr continued during and after the House Communications Subcommittee’s hearing Wednesday to dodge what ended up being a bipartisan push to pin him down on his position on proposals for the agency to eliminate or ease the existing 39% national TV station audience reach cap. During the hearing, Carr faced continued criticism from Democrats about his media regulatory actions since taking the helm last year. Meanwhile, he encountered universal praise from Republicans, including for implementing the 800 MHz spectrum pipeline Congress passed as part of the 2025 budget reconciliation package (see 2601140064).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Carr refused after the hearing to tell reporters whether his position on lifting the cap might shift because of President Donald Trump’s criticism of those proposals in November, when he said they might aid broadcasters that he sees as favoring Democrats (see 2511240055). Media industry lobbyists noted perceptions that Carr may be slow-walking action on the cap proposals while he waits for more definitive signals from Trump (see 2601130067). The issue will come up before Congress again soon at a yet-to-be-scheduled Senate Commerce Committee hearing (see 2601130068).
“We haven’t made a final decision on that” yet, Carr told reporters. “I think one thing that I've been very clear about is I'm concerned about the increasing power of the national programmers, [whether] it's Comcast, Disney or otherwise, and that’s going to be part of the calculus that the FCC makes.” Carr made similar comments in response to questions from multiple House Communications lawmakers from both parties.
“The position of the FCC consistently over the prior four chairs … has always been that the 39% cap is a rule that [the agency] has on our code of regulations,” Carr told House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., but he hedged about whether the commission requires a new mandate from Congress. Pallone argued that the FCC “does not have the power to raise the [cap], which can only be changed by Congress.” Several Democrats who objected to proposals to lift the cap couched it as part of general criticism of Carr’s media regulatory actions.
Some GOP Support
House Communications Chairman Richard Hudson of North Carolina and other Republicans at the hearing were far more supportive of the cap proposals. Hudson noted that he led a March 2025 letter to Carr urging a major revamp of “outdated ownership rules.”
Current “ownership caps prevent broadcasters from combining or expanding operations, constraining their ability to invest in local journalism,” Hudson said Wednesday. “Updating these caps would help ensure broadcasters remain viable and competitive without creating monopolies. It would empower local stations to better compete against dominant platforms. I urge the commission to keep these realities in mind as you continue your deregulatory agenda.”
Meanwhile, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., came out against both the elimination of the cap and Nexstar’s proposed $6.2 billion purchase of Tegna. Stefanik, a former House Republican Conference chair, argued in a Dec. 12 letter to Carr, released Wednesday, that the FCC “cannot lift or weaken [the cap] without the consent of Congress.” Such action “would give Nexstar a reach of over 80% of American television households. In some markets, Nexstar would own 2 to 4 network affiliates, giving them a near-monopoly over many Americans’ local news.”
The Reagan administration “first instituted the cap to protect local television and news from being owned and coordinated by major networks,” Stefanik said in the letter. “Allowing these station groups and networks, many of which have biases toward liberal viewpoints, to consolidate would give them the ability to control and coordinate local news against Republicans. ... Consolidation would also end localism in smaller media markets in favor of national talking points provided by corporations based in major cities.”