In article , "Bert Craig"
writes:

"Rupert" wrote in message
link.net...
Len Over 21 wrote:

As of 6 PM EST on 11 November 2003, the number of ECFS
documents on public view a

What would be interesting is to find out how many are for the change,
and how many want to keep the code.

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if there was a
ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed hams. As long as quorum is
met, it's on! This concept (Democracy) frightens the bejesus out of many
folks who claim to speak for those not yet licensed.

But that's an empty argument. Get licensed and vote, tah dah! The big bad
"barrier" does not preclude anyone from getting their no-code Tech ticket
and executing a vote.

Simply announce a "record date" by which one must be licensed (To give those
"yet to be licensed a fair shot at a voice in the process.) and send a
ballot out to all those licensed "of record." Makes too much sense and
requires some effort. IOW, against the contemporary trend.

Perhaps, but you might find that it's more complex than it appears at first.

Suppose someone did, indeed, poll everyone with a US ham license.

First off, there'd be a considerable number of ballots returned because the
license holder was either dead, dropped out, or didn't have a current address
in the database. Note that the last in that list is a rules violation.....

Second, the survey would have to be carefully constructed to get accurate
results. And you'd probably find that there's a wider diversity of opinion than
just "keep the code test/dump the code test". Yet at the same time you'd want
the survey to be simple.

Perhaps something like this:

"What is your opinion of code testing for an amateur license?"

1) It should be totally abolished
2) It should be required only for Extra
3) It should be required only for Extra and General
4) It should be required for any license with HF privileges
5) It should be required for any amateur license
6) No opinion/don't care

Yet this question doesn't address code speed or medical waivers, or other
possibilities like "choose the code test or a special written test".

The more choices given, the greater the possibility that none of them would be
a majority answer, or even a clear plurality. Then you'd be right back where
you were before.

Or you might find that the majority opinion was 6). What happens in that case?

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 16 Nov 2003 01:28:42 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if there was a
ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed hams.

Suppose someone did, indeed, poll everyone with a US ham license.

First question: who is going to front the six figures required to
send out the ballots even by bulk mail? The FCC?

No way - contrary to urban legend, for the last 10 years or so, all
government agencies pay full postage rates on everything they mail -
except for Congressional mailings, of course.

"What is your opinion of code testing for an amateur license?"

1) It should be totally abolished
2) It should be required only for Extra
3) It should be required only for Extra and General
4) It should be required for any license with HF privileges
5) It should be required for any amateur license
6) No opinion/don't care

Or you might find that the majority opinion was 6). What happens in
that case?

Or it's a tie between #6 and no response ???

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 16 Nov 2003 01:28:42 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if there was
a
ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed hams.

Suppose someone did, indeed, poll everyone with a US ham license.

First question: who is going to front the six figures required to
send out the ballots even by bulk mail? The FCC?

No way - contrary to urban legend, for the last 10 years or so, all
government agencies pay full postage rates on everything they mail -
except for Congressional mailings, of course.

"What is your opinion of code testing for an amateur license?"

1) It should be totally abolished
2) It should be required only for Extra
3) It should be required only for Extra and General
4) It should be required for any license with HF privileges
5) It should be required for any amateur license
6) No opinion/don't care

Or you might find that the majority opinion was 6). What happens in
that case?

Or it's a tie between #6 and no response ???

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

No response would probably be the commonest item even if the ballots come
with return postage paid by the government.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On 16 Nov 2003 01:28:42 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if there
was
a
ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed hams.

Suppose someone did, indeed, poll everyone with a US ham license.

First question: who is going to front the six figures required to
send out the ballots even by bulk mail? The FCC?

No way - contrary to urban legend, for the last 10 years or so, all
government agencies pay full postage rates on everything they mail -
except for Congressional mailings, of course.

"What is your opinion of code testing for an amateur license?"

1) It should be totally abolished
2) It should be required only for Extra
3) It should be required only for Extra and General
4) It should be required for any license with HF privileges
5) It should be required for any amateur license
6) No opinion/don't care

Or you might find that the majority opinion was 6). What happens in
that case?

Or it's a tie between #6 and no response ???

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

No response would probably be the commonest item even if the ballots come
with return postage paid by the government.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Bottom line, who cares since the entire concept
is a joke anyway and stands NO chance of ever
happening.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 16 Nov 2003 01:28:42 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if there was a
ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed hams.

Suppose someone did, indeed, poll everyone with a US ham license.

First question: who is going to front the six figures required to
send out the ballots even by bulk mail? The FCC?

Never happen. And with return postage guaranteed it could get close to seven
figures.

No way - contrary to urban legend, for the last 10 years or so, all
government agencies pay full postage rates on everything they mail -
except for Congressional mailings, of course.

Isn't it neat how Congress passes all sorts of rules for everyone else but
exempts itself from those very rules? Classic case of "do as I say, not as I
do"...

"What is your opinion of code testing for an amateur license?"

1) It should be totally abolished
2) It should be required only for Extra
3) It should be required only for Extra and General
4) It should be required for any license with HF privileges
5) It should be required for any amateur license
6) No opinion/don't care

Or you might find that the majority opinion was 6). What happens in
that case?

Or it's a tie between #6 and no response ???

'zactly. But I don't think it would be that bad.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Rupert" wrote in message

Simply announce a "record date" by which one must be licensed (To give
those
"yet to be licensed a fair shot at a voice in the process.) and send a
ballot out to all those licensed "of record." Makes too much sense and
requires some effort. IOW, against the contemporary trend.

Regulatory matters are not decided by ballot or popularity polls. They are
decided by an unemotional look at the facts and what is in the public
interest. Thus the *quantity* of comments on the petitions is of no
consequence --- all that matters are the facts and arguments presented. Most
of the comments I have read are noticeably short on persuasive arguments for
either side of the issue.

73, de Hans, K0HB

PS: Even if it were decided by "vote", the vote would be by the entire
citizenry, not only those few already favored with a license.

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

"Rupert" wrote in message

Simply announce a "record date" by which one must be licensed (To give
those
"yet to be licensed a fair shot at a voice in the process.) and send a
ballot out to all those licensed "of record." Makes too much sense and
requires some effort. IOW, against the contemporary trend.

Regulatory matters are not decided by ballot or popularity polls.

In some cases, they are. And in most cases the popularity of an issue has at
least some influence.

Do you think we'd still have code testing in the USA today if, back in 1998,
there had been an overwhelming majority of support for NCI's "5 wpm and sunset
clause" idea?

They are
decided by an unemotional look at the facts and what is in the public
interest.

Ideally, yes. In practice, that's rare. For example, is the homogenization of
broadcast radio brought about by "deregulation" of ownership in the public
interest? How about BPL and the prophecy of 'broadband nirvana" - is that in
the public interest?

If such matters "are decided by an unemotional look at the facts and what is in
the public interest", why do so commenters/petitioners give a biography of
their education and experience in their commentary? Shouldn't the facts speak
for themselves, and not depend on who is saying them?

Thus the *quantity* of comments on the petitions is of no
consequence --- all that matters are the facts and arguments presented.

I disagree. Of course, popularity alone is not the deciding factor. Nor should
it be. But popularity does have an effect in most regulatory decisions.

Most
of the comments I have read are noticeably short on persuasive arguments for
either side of the issue.

Agreed!

Even if it were decided by "vote", the vote would be by the entire
citizenry, not only those few already favored with a license.

Anyone can petition to or comment to the FCC, but in amateur license matters
there are very few outside of licensed amateurs, amateur organizations and
manufacturers of amater equipment who bother to comment.

Almost *anyone* can pass the Technician test and get a license - that's been
proven by the licensing of young children. So almost anyone who is really
interested in being included in such a poll can get a license, just as almost
any citizen over 18 who is interested in voting can register to vote.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote

If such matters "are decided by an unemotional look at the facts and what
is in
the public interest", why do so commenters/petitioners give a biography of
their education and experience in their commentary?

Because it gives them a sense of self-importance, I suppose.

So almost anyone who is really interested in being included
in such a poll can get a license, ......

Ah yes, "I got mine, now you get yours; then you can comment"!!!! (Just
when I was looking for a good example of a "sense of self-importance"!)

73, de Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote in message
...

Do you think we'd still have code testing in the USA today if, back in
1998,
there had been an overwhelming majority of support for NCI's "5 wpm and
sunset
clause" idea?

Yes, I do ... because the FCC was bound by S25.5 of the ITU Radio
Regulations.
(The ONLY reason they gave for keeping the 5 wpm requirement at the time.)

NCI asked the FCC to eliminate code testing if they could see their way
clear,
but we frankly were not surprised by the outcome.

73,
Carl - wk3c

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...

Do you think we'd still have code testing in the USA today if, back in
1998,
there had been an overwhelming majority of support for NCI's "5 wpm and
sunset
clause" idea?

Yes, I do ... because the FCC was bound by S25.5 of the ITU Radio
Regulations.
(The ONLY reason they gave for keeping the 5 wpm requirement at the time.)

You misunderstood me, Carl. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Note that I wrote "still have code testing in the USA today" (emphasis on
"today")

IIRC, NCI asked for 5 wpm right away and a sunset clause that would dump
Element 1 if/when S25.5 removed the treaty requirement. FCC did the 5 wpm thing
but did not enact the sunset provision.

My point was that I think if there had been overwhelming support of both parts
of the NCI proposal, FCC would have done the sunset clause thing and code
testing would have disappeeared in the USA more than five months ago. YMMV.

NCI asked the FCC to eliminate code testing if they could see their way
clear,
but we frankly were not surprised by the outcome.

Was there not a request for a sunset clause that would do it automatically?

73 de Jim, N2EY