WASHINGTON, D.C. — Yes, the House Commerce Committee is the chief organization that maintains oversight of the Federal Communications Commission. But the House Appropriations Committee also holds a level of jurisdiction over the FCC, namely when it comes to its fiscal budgets. That explains why its Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government convened an oversight hearing featuring Chairman Brendan Carr on Wednesday morning.
As expected, Republicans lauded Carr for his budget-slashing efforts while Democrats had plenty of queries regarding efforts they believe are being directed by the Trump Administration and not independently by the agency.
The session kicked off with Financial Services and General Government Chairman Dave Joyce (R-Ohio) thanking Carr for his leadership at the Commission, noting that since FY 2023 the FCC has received “flat funding” of $390.2 million and that the FCC’s appropriation “is fully offset by the collection of regulatory fees paid by license holders.”
Not only is the FCC’s appropriation fully offset, Joyce shared that the Commission “routinely transfers any excess revenue to the Treasury for deficit reduction.”
While the Carr Commission’s “efforts to identify and remove unnecessary regulations that inhibit innovation and economic growth” are something Joyce has been “encouraged” by, he also acknowledged the FCC “has also taken concrete steps to streamline agency processes and eliminate wasteful spending.”
Joyce, in particular, pointed to the announcement last week that the FCC has reduced the total contract ceiling value by more than $567 million. That was a topic that came up repeatedly across the hearing, along with “The Rip and Replace” program allowing serving providers to replace Chinese equipment deemed a risk to national security.
“I am interested to learn more about these efforts, the steps Chairman Carr is taking to improve the agency’s fiscal health, and his priorities more generally for the Federal Communications Commission, and how this Committee can assist in achieving those goals,” Joyce said.
HOYER’S MINORITY VOICE OF CONCERN
As Ranking Member of the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) Appropriations Subcommittee, longtime Maryland Democratic House Member Steny Hoyer serves as the senior voice of opposition to the GOP when it comes to fiscal matters and the FCC. In his opening statement, Hoyer thanked Carr for appearing at the hearing while warning, “We had a good conversation in my office. This probably won’t be as cordial as we were, but I’m very concerned.”
Why? Hoyer continued, “When Donald Trump spoke before the Congress in March, he said this: ‘I’ve stopped all government censorship and brought back free speech in America – it’s back,’ he said. Now, he also said during the campaign, to his supporters, ‘I am your retribution.’ You may remember that quote. That rang in my ears and gave me great concern.”
For Hoyer, the FCC’s actions since President Trump returned to the White House “make it clear just how relevant those comments were. What was once an independent, impartial agency – not always – devoted to keeping Americans connected has become, in my view, to some degree ‘the speech police,’ another cudgel in the President’s culture war.”
Ensuring employers hiring practices are not discriminatory through diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives was also addressed by the Congressman. Hoyer lamented how, in the days since the second Trump Adminstration began, the FCC “has gone after private corporations over their DEI practices. Very frankly, in my view is, that may be a practice that he can impose on the federal government, but it is not a practice that he can impose, nor should he impose on the private sector whatever the views we may hold.”
Roughly one hour into the hearing, Democratic House Member Sanford Bishop, who represents Middle and Southwest Georgia, asked if “approvals and enforcement actions have been conditioned on private companies DEI practices.” If so, the public “deserves to know how much of the agency’s time and taxpayer funding has been spent on investigating and challenging these practices.” For Bishop, this means de-prioritizing other critical issues including broadband affordability, rural broadband, and efficient use of the spectrum.
Carr’s response when asked to quantify the staff and resources used, he replied, “I can work with the team to see if we have any data available for you, but what I can assure you is that over these first 100 days there has been no ‘trade-offs’ in terms of pursuing one issue set like this versus rural broadband or other issues.”
“What was once an independent, impartial agency – not always – devoted to keeping Americans connected has become, in my view, to some degree ‘the speech police,’ another cudgel in the President’s culture war.” — Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)
Hoyer also criticized the FCC for “targeting” NPR, PBS, NBC, ABC, and CBS, and other networks, “apparently, who are perceived unfavorably to the President and to his policies.”
In concluding his remarks, which also touched on broadband matters, Hoyer said, “I want to be clear that I’m worried that the FCC, and so many other elements of government that ought to be independent, are, in the President’s words – not referring to anything that I’ve referred to – but weaponizing government. The FCC’s attacks on the press and the First Amendment are troubling.”
HIGH PRIORITIES FOR CARR
Carr began his prepared remarks by honing in on the priorities the Commission has been advancing at the FCC since January, while updating the Subcommittee on the agency’s budgetary actions. Carr also hoped to discuss “the priorities I would like to pursue in Fiscal Year 2026.”
He first touched on some of the accomplishments already seen under his chairmanship, including “steps to unleash new high-speed infrastructure builds.” Carr also used his appearance on Capitol Hill to implore Congress to restore the FCC’s spectrum auction authority. Then, there’s the regulatory modernization effort underway at the Commission.
“Consistent with my goals as Chairman to encourage innovation and deliver efficient results, the FCC launched a massive deregulatory effort titled, ‘In Re: Delete, Delete, Delete,’” he said. “Right now, the FCC is doing a top to bottom review of every rule, regulation, and guidance document for the purpose of eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens. We received great feedback from a range of stakeholders already and plan on eliminating onerous, antiquated, and unlawful requirements across the board.”
During the hearing, some Subcommittee Members questioned Carr about the agency’s headcount. “With a focus on efficiency,” he noted that at the beginning of Fiscal Year 2025, the FCC employed 1,461 full-time employees. As of April 28, 2025, the FCC employed 1,383 full-time employees. Was this due to early retirement packages? Some may have opted to take this route, but the natural “fork in the road” that comes with a change in political parties in the White House is also a reason for the change, Carr explained.
And with that reduced authorized contract spending ceiling by more than $567 million, there were plenty of queries about this, too. What can the FCC see immediately from this effort? Carr shared that the agency found more than $6.7 million in savings for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2025.
The hearing, which concluded just before Noon Eastern, also saw Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) get testy with Carr during his five minutes of questioning, in which he followed up on DEI questions posed by Rep. Bishop. In particular, he probed Carr with respect to his letter sent to Verizon accusing them of engaging in “invidious discrimination.” On May 15, Verizon sent a letter back acknowledging this, noting that it responded by making changes to its DEI policies. This put the wheels in motion and, one day later, saw the FCC approve Verizon’s merger with Frontier Communications.
Responding to how the DEI matter seemingly influenced the FCC’s ultimate regulatory approval of the $20 billion deal, Carr explained that “rules on our books that deal with EEO” were taken into consideration as part of the normal review process. Not satisfied, Ivey noted that the FCC approved the deal just 24 hours after receiving the Verizon letter noting it had amended its DEI policies. But, he had to ask this: Did the FCC receive any complaints from those working at Verizon linked to discrimination, which led Carr to write to the company about its DEI initiatives?
“As a general matter, two things have taken place …” Carr replied before being cut off by Ivey, who said, “Not a general matter: were there any particular allegations against Verizon before you sent this letter?” Carr continued with his answer, noting that when he started as Chair, “we ended the FCC’s own definition of DEI.”
Still displeased with Carr’s response, Ivey pressed on, asking if there was any “factual basis” for the letter sent to Verizon on DEI practices. Were there any complaints reviewed filed by the EEOC or court cases alleging discrimination against Verizon?
Carr and Ivey continued to tussle as the Congressman’s time expired, with Carr doing the best he could to illustrate how the agency acted with its review and eventual Memorandum Opinion and Order approving the Verizon-Frontier deal. Ivey renewed his questioning with some 15 minutes left in the hearing, with the Democrat continuing to probe how the Carr Commission removed a block on the Verizon transaction based on “one whistleblower page” tied to DEI.
