| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#10
August 5th 05, 07:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
From: "Bill Sohl" on Fri 5 Aug 2005 13:50
wrote in message Phil Kane wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: If nothing else, all of us can at least say that we let FCC know where we stood. And the FCC let us all know where it stood when the NPRM was released. Does anyone deny that the horserace is fixed and that the majority wishes have nothing to do with the outcome? Writeth this OF on 21 July: "This "NPRM" is not "an opportunity to comment", it's an announcement about the way it's absolutely gonna be. Period. They'll go thru the NPRM motions only because the law sez they have to and they'll patiently tap their fingers on the table until the deluge of desparate commnents is over then declare the POS they published today a done deal." Ignore the speling and thankew. Anyone who thinks that flooding the FCC with "comments" will make a whit of difference on this one doesn't understand how/why democracy beltway-style actually works. Bottom line here... 1. The discussion as to value or need to have any code test was completely discussed prior to 2000 when the FCC specifically called for such discussion (NPRM 98-143). Bill, there was also discussion 15 years ago in FCC 90-53 on the creation of the no-code-test Technician class. 2. Thousands of comments were filed with various rationals in support of code testing....the FCC in their R&O reviewed and dismissed every pro-code test argument.... That's true enough but is not acceptible to the MMMs in here. 3. The ONLY reason the FCC kept even a 5wpm test was because of the international treaty requiring a code test. Well, there was undoubtedly a lot of heated discussion from a lobbying group for a noted membership organization... presumably that is since we in this "democracy" don't get to actually observe such. :-) However, the final word was in 99-412, the R&O establishing this recent restructuring. 4. The WRC-2003 review resulted in elimination of any code test requirement in the international treaty with almost unanomous agreement by the countries to do so. The bellweather of that was the IARU's decision to support optional code testing by administrations beginning in 2000. U.S. hams tend to be a bit bigoted about their "preeminence" in amateur radio so they don't look at much of what the rest of the world is deciding by theirselves. 5. The current NPRM, in short, deletes code testing for USA amateurs as allowed now by the international treaty. The FCC, now has an open comment period for discussion of the proposed change. Well, the Federal Register for 5 Aug 05 doesn't have any mention of either 05-143 or 05-235...in fact doesn't have any mention of the FCC at all. Neither have I had any response to a query to the FCC on whether or not the Comment period has "officially" started. We will have to assume that it has started since, on the 13th day of opening of an ECFS slot (for 05-235), there are almost 700 Comments! 6. Unless some great new and profound reason to retain code testing surfaces via the 05-235 comment process, any prospect of keeping any code test is just not going to happen. The old arguments (and that's all that any PCTAs have been rehashing) have no chance of winning out since they failed in 98-143, WRC-2003, etc. Well, we didn't have the Homeland Security angle in '98. :-) [that Department didn't exist then...] 7. Any argument or claim that the code test should be retained if a majority of hams want it so isn't going to happen either. For two reasons: (a) The FCC doesn't make the rules that way and The process of rule making is abundantly clear to those who wish to see examples on the FCC website...or bother to look in volume 1 of the 5-volume printed version of Title 47 C.F.R. One does NOT need to go to law school to understand 99+ percent of that. Hundreds of examples of the recent past in civil radio to observe. Too many have the false idea that "ham regs" are established as if done in a local club or membership group. Not so since the laws ARE laws, not "by-laws" and must follow legalities of much precedence, possible review by the courts later, and their effect on ALL citizens, not just the clubhouse folks. Amateur radio is really a very small part of the activity of the FCC...one indicator is that the "Amatuer" page from the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau page doesn't have any "headline" entries after 2002...obviously there were a lot of things happening after 2002 but 455 12th St SW folks just haven't bothered to update it. (b) The majority of current comments are actually running better than 2 to 1 in favor of total elimination of code testing. On the 13th day of commenting on 05-235, whether "official" or not, the ratio of For:Against on the NPRM is hovering around 3:1 in favor of For as of about 1 PM Eastern time with 680 entries. That's an overall average of 52 comments a day. Note: The above doesn't take into account the "in-betweeners" who agree that "lower-class" licensees should not be code- tested but Extras or Extras and Generals should be code-tested. In-betweeners account for about 10 percent of total comments. Those in-betweeners could be taken into the For side or the Against side but a rather clear majority FOR the NPRM would still ensue, the ratio still ABOVE 2:1 in favor of FOR. Now it is predictable that someone will rationalize "the sampling is too small" or that "we must wait to see the 'true' trend" but that is still little more than spite on their part. Morse code testing is a HIGHLY polarized subject and there has been a two-decade growing opinion to get rid of it as a federal regulation. It should now be abundantly clear that the MAJORITY feels it should be eliminated. What is most strange to me is that there is so little mention of the Against side on establishing an "ex-officio" (i.e., not by federal regulation) radiotelegraphy award or certificate of merit by a NEW group to demonstrate the alleged efficacy of morsemanship skills. I can see only two commenters hinting at that. Now if morsemanship is so darn good, so superb, so attractive to all who try it, then it would be natural to assume at least one new group to spring into existance pushing for morsemanship. All that appears in the comments Against are the tired old cliches and morsemyths which have been seen by me for a half century. Those old warhorse maxims just haven't done the job to attract enough. Those who have made it through the federal tests rationalize that "it is still good" but they are just whistling in the graveyard...they are in the MINORITY now and they are (as they should be) very uncomfortable. dit rid |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Latest Online Oldies shows on Rock-it Radio | Broadcasting | |||
| New York Art Show Shuttered After Bush Monkey Portrait | Shortwave | |||
| Latest 50's Rock and Roll Shows Online | Broadcasting | |||
| 6th Annual East Coast vs. West Coast Oldies Show online at Rock-it Radio | Broadcasting | |||
Threaded Mode
