(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: "Phil Kane"
Date: 9/21/2004 1:13 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

On 21 Sep 2004 00:12:02 GMT, Alun wrote:

The US may be the last country to abolish the code test, the way things are
going. Mind you, AFAIK the code test has still not been abolished in Spain
or Italy(?), although I don't think there's a code test anywhere else much
in Europe anymore.

Most of the countries where the code test has been dropped do not
have the same requirement for rules changes that the US has, such as
consideration of public input and comments, publication of notice of
rulemaking, petitions for reconsideration and court appeals, etc.

They just DO it ..... (usually because someone in the regulatory
Administration thinks that it is a good thing to do without public
input....)

But Phil, after the opening of the No Code Tech in 91 along with the FCC's
stated psoition on the relevence of Code testing, along with the tons of papaer
they've received on it already, just how many more "hearings" or comments do
they need?

Doesn't matter, Steve. Once they decided to go the NPRM route, the
wheels will turn at their designated speed.

Note also that the quoted code-test positions of FCC are close to 5
years old. (The Report and Order for 98-143 was written in late 1999).
Maybe all the comments have had an impact.

If the code test is such a "barrier" to would-be hams, why aren't they
telling FCC? When you total up the comments *by author*, you find that
most people who bother to comment want to keep at least some code
testing. You also find that most commenters already have a ham
license. What you do not see are large numbers of nonhams telling FCC
that they'd become hams if the code test were removed. So wouldn't it
make sense for FCC to conclude that there are *not* a lot of people
who are "being kept out" by the code test?

I think N8UZE has a very valid point that all the proposals simply
slow the machinery down. Note that NCVEC has *two* proposals!

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote

So wouldn't it make sense for FCC to conclude
that there are *not* a lot of people
who are "being kept out" by the code test?

I don't think the code test keeps anyone out of the Amateur Radio
service.

On a somewhat related matter, I also don't think that we need a code
test to prove anyone's worthiness to operate on amateur frequencies
below 30MHz.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and
finds
himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of
people
who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way."
-- Bokonon

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote

So wouldn't it make sense for FCC to conclude
that there are *not* a lot of people
who are "being kept out" by the code test?

I don't think the code test keeps anyone out of the Amateur Radio
service.

Agreed!

The people who disagree are those who say the code test must go to "foster and
insure growth", that it is a "barrier", etc.

On a somewhat related matter, I also don't think that we need a code
test to prove anyone's worthiness to operate on amateur frequencies
below 30MHz.

I agree partially - if it were up to me, all amateur licenses would require a
code test, not just those with privileges below 30 MHz. (But it's not up to
me).

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think N8UZE has a very valid point that all the proposals simply
slow the machinery down. Note that NCVEC has *two* proposals!


That machinery is probably a few brearucrats that will get to
it when there's nothing else to do....