On September 15, 2023, I received an email from Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. It was addressed to Lenore but I read it anyway.
Congresswoman Greene wrote:
Lenore,
I’m proud to co-sponsor H.R. 3413, the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act.
AM radio keeps Americans informed and safe and is the backbone of FEMA’s National Public Warning System. Americans utilize AM radio stations to obtain trusted, accurate emergency information about how and where to evacuate, and emergency alerts relating to tornados, wildfires, floods, major accidents, and other crises. Federal, state, and local authorities rely on AM radio to broadcast local alerts about severe weather, child and elder abductions, and traffic and other emergencies to the public via the Emergency Alert Service, Amber Alerts, and Highway Advisory Radio, respectively.
When all other services are unavailable, and the power is out, a car’s AM radio is a lifeline. There is no alternative that has the reach and resiliency of AM radio stations, a service that is free to all listeners and doesn’t require a subscription, data plan, or other fees. More than 80 million Americans regularly listen to AM radio and six in 10 radio fans even cited the lack of cost as one of the top two drivers for tuning in.
91% of vehicle owners say having a radio in the dashboard is important. During times of crisis, AM radio listenership increases significantly. When Hurricane Ian hit Florida in 2022, listenership in Orlando, Miami, and Tampa spiked as much as 123%.
AM radio is one of the most dependable ways to reach individuals across the country. Every FEMA Administrator in the last 30 years has warned that removing AM radio from vehicles represents a threat to public safety.
This legislation ensuring AM radio be included in every vehicle is a common-sense policy that will serve every Northwest Georgian in rural District 14. No one should be in the dark during an emergency, and ensuring quick access to timely information from first responders can be the difference between life and death.
I replied:
Dear Congresswoman Greene,
I’m a fan of many of your views on foreign policy. I don’t get, though, why you think people should be forced to buy cars with AM radios. Shouldn’t that be up to them?
Best,
David R. Henderson
Research Fellow, Hoover Institution
Go through all of her reasons and you can find many of them persuasive. But persuasive of what? She seems to be saying that she has thought of AM uses that people value but haven’t thought of themselves. Does she really think that car companies are so not motivated by profit that they would fail to provide features whose costs are below the value consumers place on them? Apparently so.
Congresswoman Greene is a “woman of system,” to the term Adam Smith used, updated for gender.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz is a man of system. He wants to mandate AM radio also, but justifies it as an issue of freedom of speech. But requiring AM radio to get free speech is like requiring that I buy a local newspaper. I get plenty of speech without it and free speech is not about requiring people to buy things that make communicating lower-cost for others.
Fortunately, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is thinking clearly about the issue.
READER COMMENTS
Jon Murphy
Dec 6 2023 at 8:20am
This is probably something I should look into now that I live in a hurricane-prone area, but I was unaware that AM radio is “the backbone of FEMA’s National Public Warning System.” I’ve always relied on my phone (and the already mandatory warning systems built into those) for information about weather and other emergencies.
It’s not obvious what advantage AM has over already-existing methods. She says: “When all other services are unavailable, and the power is out, a car’s AM radio is a lifeline.” Perhaps, but how often is that? Even in significant storms like Katrina, or Ida, I doubt it was the case that AM was the last available option.
Besides, is this really the most cost-effective option? I mean, it relies on people having cars. True, about 90% of American households have at least one car, but that is still 10% without. If the goal is to make lines of communication robust, wouldn’t it make more sense to just require every household have an emergency crank radio?
Andrew_FL
Dec 6 2023 at 8:58am
The real issue is that it isore difficult and expensive to engineer an AM radio receiver for electric vehicles because of interference from the motors. So electric vehicle mandates are going to kill AM radio. Unfortunately the solution of piling more mandates on top existing ones will not work. What we need is an end to electric vehicle mandates.
steve
Dec 6 2023 at 3:46pm
Ending the electric vehicle mandates is fine with me, but this issue is still a problem. All cars have a lot more electronics which can cause interference, the EV motors are just the latest and worst. Note also that car companies started dropping AM radio back in 2014 and companies were planning to drop them from gas vehicles. People use alternatives much more frequently. Article cited claims 47 million people still use AM radio but that’s 20-25% of the adult population. I dont think the younger people I work with use anything other than Spotify of something on their phones. Just list it as an option but with the caveat that you will have some hum present. See how much people want to pay for it.
Steve
Monte
Dec 6 2023 at 12:16pm
There’s more going on here than meets the ear. EV manufacturers are obviously engaged in a conspiracy to eliminate the influence of conservative AM radio with the bogus claim that AM frequencies “don’t play nicely” with EV motors. :j
But seriously, AM radio represents a major source of political capital for conservative politicians, so we can understand why Greene and Cruz are frantically trying to preserve it.
David Henderson
Dec 6 2023 at 3:14pm
You write:
I’m guessing you’re right. I didn’t mention that because I don’t like to attribute motives to people I don’t know. The nice thing about arguing the way I do is that I don’t need to know their motives to know that they are trying to impose their will by force, whatever their motives,
Matthias
Dec 6 2023 at 7:26pm
Why is it so important to preserve amplitude modulation radio? Wouldn’t frequency modulation radio work just as well, or better, for all the reasons cited by the politicians, but be less suspectible to interference?
The only downside of FM that I’m aware of is that the technology used to be more expensive. But both AM and FM radio receivers are dirt cheap today anyway.
I agree that this mandate is a bit silly. But I want to understand it on its own silly terms.
William Wiltschko
Dec 6 2023 at 10:53pm
There are a few technical issues that are important for this discussion. First is the frequency. AM signals are in the range of one megahertz while FM is about 100 megahertz. The latter frequencies are line-of-sight and do not work in hilly areas or over the horizon. AM signals work over hundreds of miles and can even be refracted by the ionosphere to reach a thousand or more miles away. There are designated AM stations at 50kw power that have backup power and transmitters just for emergencies.
Second, it is cheap but not costless to make AM radios work in EVs. The same is true for ICE cars as well (spark plugs make lots of electrical noise), but we are so used to AM radios working in ICE cars that we don’t think about it. From the manufacturer’s point of view, having the capability to add an AM radio costs money. From society’s point of view (and maybe the FCC’s), not having this capability means we will have millions of traveling RF noise generators.
Third, in some emergencies, nothing works. Not phones, not the internet, and not radio stations without emergency power. The only technical medium that may work is amateur radio, where enterprising hobbyists built their own emergency power and transmitter systems. This was true during last year’s hurricanes. Even when the phone system has power (landlines have backup power from the phone company), they don’t work because everyone is trying to use them at the same time – which they weren’t designed for.
I support AM radios in EVs. It makes us more resilient as a society. It is arguably a public good. It is also cheap. I would prefer the choice be up to the consumer, who will not have a choice if manufacturers choose against them.
David Henderson
Dec 7 2023 at 10:21am
Thanks, Bill, for that interesting and informative technical discussion.
You and I disagree about what choice means. First, consumers do get to choose if they want an AM and choose a car made by a manufacturer who has AM. Second, and more important, it’s not choice if the manufacturer is not free to choose.
I’ll give an extreme example that makes my second point. I don’t go into a Taco Bell and order moo shu pork. If I tried to, they would probably laugh at me. But in refusing to provide moo shu pork, they are exercising their freedom of choice. They are not taking away my freedom of choice.
To take a less extreme example, decades ago, A&W had one of my favorite meals: fish and chips. A&W quit providing it. I regret that. I miss it. But A&W didn’t violate my freedom of choice.
William Wiltschko
Dec 7 2023 at 1:04pm
Thanks, David,
I debated whether to add the comment about choice. Maybe I shouldn’t have. Anyway, would you change your mind about choice, in the A&W example, if all restaurants banded together to not offer fish and chips, and if fish and chips were an important component of a public good?
Herb
Dec 6 2023 at 11:28pm
My wife listens to AM when she drives. I never listen to AM, rarely FM, but usually satellite radio. We listen to MP3s on long road trips (especially EconTalk).
One factor on the radio signals: AM has a longer range than FM. FM is more line-of-sight & AM will bounce off the ionosphere. In addition, FM is at a higher frequency and attenuates at a more rapid rate.
There are so many stations of all types, scattered almost everywhere, I do not believe it matters anymore.
Pete Smoot
Dec 7 2023 at 10:19am
Dollars to doughnuts this really is about conservative AM talk radio. Personally I wasn’t aware this was still a major thing, it sounds so ’90s.
I still have to wonder why car companies would be moving to eliminate AM radios. You’d imagine they’d talk to their customers and find out how often they listen to AM. To stereotype a bit, I’d imagine Tesla would be first in line to eliminate AM while the F-150 product line would be last.
From my personal experience, I live in earthquake country (SF Bay Area). I don’t think it would occur to me to listen for updates on AM radio. Someone would have to tell me to turn it on. Using that argument for keeping AM radio feels a lot like mandating each town must have a telegraph terminal. Maybe that was a great technology at the time but that time is rapidly ending. If you’re going to argue we need AM because FEMA depends on it, you also have to advocate for FEMA finding an alternative.
Monte
Dec 7 2023 at 11:05am
I thought so, as well. Although, if this were the case, why would a staunch liberal democrat like Ed Markey sponsor such a bill that appears to be getting broad bipartisan support? They’re spinning “public safety” as the primary reason for the AM For Every Vehicle act, but I wonder what is truly motivating this intervention beyond any real or perceived threat to conservative talk radio?
Comments are closed.