"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: "KØHB"
Date: 12/26/03 8:00 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote

those who want something for nothing

Ah, yes, when they can't make a reasoned argument they trot out the old
"something for nothing" mantra.

Ah, yes...the "if they can't argue the argument, make fun of it"
mantra.

Sorry, but that just doesn't stand up in the light of day, Steve.

Sure it does, Hans. The present system was set up in such a way as
to
encourage licensees to pursue a program of self study.

The alternatives I have seen here lately suggest that potential new
licensees are either idiots for whom we must dilute the test to it's least
common denominator, or that we must hang a seriously big carrot out in
front to
get them to get involved. THAT doesn't stand up in the light of day,
Hans.

The current licensing strucure has already PROVEN that the tests are
reasonable (when the material is sequestered) and that it provides for a
structured occupancy of the bands.

There was no "ghettos" from Incentive Licensing, Hans. Yes, there
were
hundreds of disenfranchised Amateurs who were, in fact, cheated out of
something they had already been using. That was indeed unfair to say the
very
least.

As for "free upgrades", the FCC already unleased THAT genie with
thier
last round of "restructuring" with no help at all from the ARRL.

73

Steve, K4YZ


Know what would solve a *lot* of discontent with the current licensing
system(?)--at least from the perspective of those who think the current
system lends itself to "dumbed" down hams; which is absurd by the way, there
a loads of dumbed down long-licensed hams.

Keep the written exam, nix all CW or alternative mode testing, and increase
the license fee to at least that of the GMRS fee of $75.00 (not sure for how
long that $75.00 is good for).

Kim W5TIT

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:28:40 -0600, Kim W5TIT wrote:

Keep the written exam, nix all CW or alternative mode testing,

So far I agree with you, with the caveat that the content of the
exams at each level be of significance.

and increase the license fee to at least that of the GMRS fee of
$75.00 (not sure for how long that $75.00 is good for).

There's where we differ. At present there is no license fee paid to
the U S Treasury via the FCC. The League worked very hard to make
sure that the politicians didn't have such a route to our wallets
and I feel strongly that it should remain that way. Unfortunately,
we were not successful in keeping the so-called "vanity call sign"
program fee-free - even the sobriquet "vanity" was imposed by The
Congress. I would have liked it called something else, like
"selected".

Note that the FCC doesn't get a nickel of license fees - they go
directly into the Treasury's General Fund. The requirement for
levying such fees is mandated by act of Congress and the FCC just
jumps and asks "how high" on the way up.

The exam fee paid to the private-sector VE teams is something else,
and can only be imposed on a reimbursement level.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane