Fedorchak joins Punchbowl News for conversation on expanding spectrum, powering AI, and rebuilding America’s infrastructure edge

Washington, D.C. - Congresswoman Julie Fedorchak (R-ND) joined Punchbowl News Founder and CEO, and North Dakota native, Anna Palmer this week for a conversation to discuss American leadership in wireless, spectrum, and AI. Fedorchak highlighted the need to pair innovation with the infrastructure that supports it-reliable power, expanded spectrum access, and a permitting framework that allows the U.S. to build faster and compete globally. Check out highlights from the event below, edited for clarity:

On delaying the American Broadband Deployment Act of 2026 Floor vote:

• Well, it's unfortunate.

• I spent 12 years as a utility regulator in North Dakota, and we permitted. That was one of our key areas of responsibility and jurisdiction. I led the permitting portfolio and permitted $15 billion worth of infrastructure.

• I know well the issues of local and state jurisdiction and input. It's really important to respect that-and it's also key to good permitting.

• I regret that locals didn't feel like they were part of the legislative conversation, but I think that is definitely fixable.

• If we want to get on board with the ultimate goal of moving infrastructure, we have to be able to start getting this infrastructure up and out, and it's going to be helpful to the locals and everybody they serve.

• So, we need to listen, acknowledge what their concerns are, and make sure they have the facts on the bill, because I think there were fewer problems in terms of taking away their jurisdiction than they think. We need to educate and bring them on board.

On how Congress could formalize the President's rate payer protection pledge:

• In terms of formalizing that pledge, I don't know that we need to take action in law.

• There's a lot of smaller things that need to happen there.

• I think some of it is on the 'grand compromise' that occurs for permitting reform-making sure we don't give away too much on the cost allocation for power lines.

• If we decide that we're going to socialize the cost of power lines to every American, then that is going to drive people's costs up, and you are going to be making every day Americans pay for infrastructure that's being used by AI and the big data centers.

• And by the way, they don't want that to happen-[the companies] want to pay. If we don't get in the way, if we create the right legal, tax, and regulatory environment, if we do the permitting reform, I think that the companies will figure this out and you will create an environment where they want to move and connect quickly. They're going to bring their own generation, their own transmission, and get it done and pay for it.

• That's already starting to happen, and with permitting reform and some guardrails on the cost allocation of transmission lines, we can ensure that the proper costs are being paid by the cost-causers.
  

On how her background informs her perspective on wireless and spectrum:

• I came here because I was concerned about the regulatory environment for energy.

• Without energy, we can't do anything. We can't actually support the broadband industry. We can't support the water. We need power to drive all of this.

• Just a close second to that is the tech industry and broadband.

• We've looked at power as a finite resource in the past, but it truly isn't. There are always new technologies.

• I come at it from a standpoint that these utility industries are so vital to everything we do in this country, and there are things that Americans completely take for granted because you all and the power providers are so good at doing the work.

• So just having that appreciation, and also an appreciation for how complicated it is.

• You have to have folks that are willing to put in the time to understand it-more than just a talking-point level but beyond that at a technical level-so you can get the policies right.

• What I bring is that appreciation and the willingness to really dig in and try to understand it so that we can get the policies right.
  

On why permitting reform is critical in competing with China:

• In the long-term, we have so many advantages that China doesn't have in terms of our innovative culture.

• But they are a country of builders, and we became a country of lawyers. We have to change that in order to fix this.

• And if you look at a graph on power, it's scary how much power China is bringing on and how little the U.S. is bringing on in comparison.

• We need these resources to stay ahead on this.

• It's not really a race, it's just a long-term mission.

• We're always going to have to be ahead on the tech side with China, so we have to get permitting reform in place. It might take 20 years to permit a new power line. Even cable-the simple stuff that's very small-and underground ones that's put in, takes years.

• Fixing that is essential to allowing the industry to build the infrastructure needed to provide all of the services that Americans want and need and depend on for their daily life.

On successful implementation of SEC's restored ability to competitively auction spectrum:

• I'm pleased FCC already has the first auction out there. I think it's for 180 megahertz of the 300 that they have to get completed in the 10-year timeframe.

• Getting those auctions out in a timely manner is vital.

• Then the second big step is going to be trickier and tougher-and that is finding and accessing the 500 other megahertz-developing the proper communication channels, coordination, and working relationships with the DOD largely to find that space and getting it done.

• Because it's a finite resource and that's scary to think about.

• But I comfort myself when you look at how technology changes-like analog TV, when we did away with that, it freed up a whole bunch of spectrum. We know that DOD has a whole bunch of those older technologies sitting out there that we can identify and get rid of and create new spectrum.

• That's how innovation and technology works.

• It's the same thing that's happened in the energy sector too. We thought we're going to run out of oil and gas. In the 70s, you couldn't use gas for anything other than gasoline. Now we're using it for power generation-that was not even allowed back in the 70s.

• Because of technology, we're able to create more. The same is true with spectrum.
  
  

On whether FCC should change CBRS band and auction those airwaves:

• I think everything needs to be explored, and we need to look at all possible angles and not keep anything off.

• We have to have good conversations with DOD.

• President Trump has done a great job with that. He believes it's not either or, it's both.

• We have to figure this out and that's what needs to happen. This is vital to national security as well.

On infrastructure challenges as it relates to meeting the energy demand for AI:

• Again, going back to my background as a utility regulator, I saw how demand was skyrocketing after years of flat demand.

• Coming here, I have taken the approach of: Stabilize, Optimize, and Grow.

• We should be using everything that we have. We shouldn't be retiring power generation right now-we need it all. So let's hold off for maybe three to five years and get as much as we can out of existing resources.

• And then we need to optimize everything that we already have-optimize our existing power lines. I introduced the High-Capacity Grid Act. Many in the room have supported that. It's aimed at just that: optimizing our existing power and transmission lines. Because building a new one is going to take five to ten years at best.

• So, optimize what we have-and we can do that. That's part of spectrum too. And then grow. Growing is permitting reform.

• We're so close. I believe we've gotten so many good things through the House. We're going to get more through this week.

• The Senate is actively working on this and coming up with, I think the 'grand bargain.'

• What I'm encouraged by is I think Republicans and Democrats understand that this is the chance.

• I know that we've been at this point before in recent years, but I think now there's a better understanding that we can't wait any longer.

• If we were to wait another Congress with the political dynamics changing, I've had even some Democrats say to me, it's not going to get better. We have to do it now.
  

On her High-Capacity Grid Act:

• This is one of those 'no-brainers' in my opinion.

• I don't understand opposing this, because if we're rebuilding, it's just obvious that we should use the new lines that have the greatest capacity so we can push the most energy through those lines.

• If we don't do it, we're just going to go slower and at a higher cost. It just doesn't make any sense.

On her CABLE Expansion Act:

• The CABLE Expansion Act is all about timelines.

• It doesn't supersede local jurisdiction. It just says to locals: you don't have an infinite amount of time to make a decision.

• That's like shot clocks, using existing infrastructure, maximizing existing infrastructure, streamlining permitting on existing corridors or areas that have been previously approved-that is just like the low hanging fruit to help us move faster and clear out some of these delays.

• Those are just commonsense changes in law that we all should be able to agree on and push through in advance.